You'd do a lot better if you didn't spend 23 hours of your 24 googling and posting reasons for your hatred.

The more you start threads like this and register countless repeating of essentially the same post, the more discredited and hard to believe your "personal story" becomes. Your posts have become a sorry diarrhea of diatribe rather than cerebral debate.

If your story is anything other than drama-queenery and you have psychological problems, this forum is not where you should seek resolutions to your them. There are professionals out there, your pastor (Rabbi?), your family, who can be a lot more helpful in your dealing with your rage.

Come on man. Clearly your are only seeing one side. Don't you have some videos of the crusades to post?

On a serious note, this is the same religion that I witenessed throwing grenades into crowded market areas to try to kill/injur Americans when I was working in Iraq as a USMC S/S team leader. Their own people and innocent bystanders be damned. One image that sticks in my head is a little boy, maybe 10 years old, who was severly injured (not sure if he lived or died) when two cowards in the back of a white truck drove and and tossed a grendade into a crowd. A couple of Marines were injured, but he was in the worst shape by far. If only I were quicker on the trigger...

To be fair, I am not positive these cowards were Muslim, but this was in Fallujah...not many Christians or Jews there....

Jaric

07-23-2011, 11:21 PM

On a serious note, this is the same religion that I witenessed throwing grenades into crowded market areas to try to kill/injur Americans when I was working in Iraq as a USMC S/S team leader. Their own people and innocent bystanders be damned. One image that sticks in my head is a little boy, maybe 10 years old, who was severly injured (not sure if he lived or died) when two cowards in the back of a white truck drove and and tossed a grendade into a crowd. A couple of Marines were injured, but he was in the worst shape by far.

That sounds eerily similar to stories I've heard told about Vietnam.

If only I were quicker on the trigger...
Not that it's any of my business, but I certainly hope you don't blame yourself for what happened.

LiveSteam

07-23-2011, 11:40 PM

Come on man. Clearly your are only seeing one side. Don't you have some videos of the crusades to post?

On a serious note, this is the same religion that I witenessed throwing grenades into crowded market areas to try to kill/injur Americans when I was working in Iraq as a USMC S/S team leader. Their own people and innocent bystanders be damned. One image that sticks in my head is a little boy, maybe 10 years old, who was severly injured (not sure if he lived or died) when two cowards in the back of a white truck drove and and tossed a grendade into a crowd. A couple of Marines were injured, but he was in the worst shape by far. If only I were quicker on the trigger...

To be fair, I am not positive these cowards were Muslim, but this was in Fallujah...not many Christians or Jews there....

I lost my friend Trisha Jamison in that fucked up city. I hate that word Fallujah. I just hate it!! Then those bastards from Kansas showed up. & it was a full blown NIGHTMARE! Fuck them people over there. The hole god dam lot of them,were not worth her life.

BucEyedPea

07-24-2011, 07:43 AM

Come on man. Clearly your are only seeing one side. Don't you have some videos of the crusades to post?

On a serious note, this is the same religion that I witenessed throwing grenades into crowded market areas to try to kill/injur Americans when I was working in Iraq as a USMC S/S team leader. Their own people and innocent bystanders be damned. One image that sticks in my head is a little boy, maybe 10 years old, who was severly injured (not sure if he lived or died) when two cowards in the back of a white truck drove and and tossed a grendade into a crowd. A couple of Marines were injured, but he was in the worst shape by far. If only I were quicker on the trigger...

To be fair, I am not positive these cowards were Muslim, but this was in Fallujah...not many Christians or Jews there....

Is it possible they saw you as invaders of their country and they were defending it?

Is it possible they saw you as invaders of their country and they were defending it?

Odds are that was the case and they had no military to a superpower.

It doesn't matter if they saw flying unicorns. They are wrong. They do NOT have that right. "They're" not in charge of shit. They don't matter, they don't have a say.

When the rest of the world starts catering to what lunatics think is when everything goes down the shitter hence my references to Haj Muhammed Amin al-Husseini.

How can you honostly be "neutral" on issues so clearly in the wrong?
BTW, when people offer excuses for something so very wrong, they're no longer neutral.

Frankie

07-24-2011, 11:42 AM

I will try and make this as brief as I can, although I find it hard to believe with your background you don't already know this. .....

That's all well and good. But the fact that I and no-one that I have met in my life hasn't bothered to know his name much less follow him should tell you how irrelevant he is to regular folks in the "Islamic world." Do not believe what you read about radical "leaders" because they are only leaders to the "radical" portion of any group.

Frankie

07-24-2011, 11:46 AM

I think that was his point. Christians can make it more personal such as seeing a picture of Jesus, having a cross with Him on it etc. Such things are considered idols in islam and strickly forbidden.

Are those honest depictions of Jesus?

Here's where I insist on supporting the Muslim beliefs. Those objects are not Jesus or God, only idols. Personal relationships with idols is not the same as personal relationship with God. The latter is only in one's heart.

go bowe

07-24-2011, 11:47 AM

That's all well and good. But the fact that I and no-one that I have met in my life hasn't bothered to know his name much less follow him should tell you how irrelevant he is to regular folks in the "Islamic world." Do not believe what you read about radical "leaders" because they are only leaders to the "radical" portion of any group.

Muslim is the youngest of the Jehovah religions. The oldest, Judaism, has always suffered at the hands of polytheistic and atheistic others. As far as I know, other than a few minor eras in the Palestinian lands over a relatively minor number of people, they have never been ones to force others to their faith or try to eradicate those who disagreed. Christians saw Judaism as a big threat and did just that for a couple of centuries while at the same time trying to subjugate Muslims with the Crusades. I understand the painful growth of the Muslim Faith.

HOWEVER, while the Muslims seem to have no problem finding hateful leaders to speak out in anger and violence against others and state their voice is the one of leadership, there have been no diametrically opposed voices of similar stature in the Muslim world against those pigs. The leaders of Baptist, Catholic, and Protestant faiths have spoke out against acts of violence perpetrated in the name of their faith. And their are no major leaders of Christianity or Judaism who rail against others and promise death in our modern era.

The Islamic faith needs to stand up and denounce the bin Laden's of this planet. Instead we get smarmy groups like "The Brotherhood of Islam" who have an outward cast of benevolence yet actually plot the assassination and murder of those opposed to their will behind closed doors.

Islam is general a peaceful organization in civilized societies, but I see no real leadership attempting to change it from a murderous tool in most third world nations.

ForeverChiefs58

07-24-2011, 12:09 PM

That's all well and good. But the fact that I and no-one that I have met in my life hasn't bothered to know his name much less follow him should tell you how irrelevant he is to regular folks in the "Islamic world." Do not believe what you read about radical "leaders" because they are only leaders to the "radical" portion of any group.

Ahhhh. Just because you didn't know his name doesn't mean you didn't get strung along from his teachings which were highly regarded among muslims. If you ever bought in to "resistance", you bought in to his teachings. As I was trying to illustrate, his torch was passed to his nephew with resistance for any peace and an evil terror for those who oppose being the key today as it was all the way back then.

Frankie

07-24-2011, 12:21 PM

Muslim is the youngest of the Jehovah religions. The oldest, Judaism, has always suffered at the hands of polytheistic and atheistic others. As far as I know, other than a few minor eras in the Palestinian lands over a relatively minor number of people, they have never been ones to force others to their faith or try to eradicate those who disagreed. Christians saw Judaism as a big threat and did just that for a couple of centuries while at the same time trying to subjugate Muslims with the Crusades. I understand the painful growth of the Muslim Faith.

HOWEVER, while the Muslims seem to have no problem finding hateful leaders to speak out in anger and violence against others and state their voice is the one of leadership, there have been no diametrically opposed voices of similar stature in the Muslim world against those pigs. The leaders of Baptist, Catholic, and Protestant faiths have spoke out against acts of violence perpetrated in the name of their faith. And their are no major leaders of Christianity or Judaism who rail against others and promise death in our modern era.

The Islamic faith needs to stand up and denounce the bin Laden's of this planet. Instead we get smarmy groups like "The Brotherhood of Islam" who have an outward cast of benevolence yet actually plot the assassination and murder of those opposed to their will behind closed doors.

Islam is general a peaceful organization in civilized societies, but I see no real leadership attempting to change it from a murderous tool in most third world nations.
Good post. Entirely.

Mizzou_8541

07-24-2011, 12:21 PM

Is it possible they saw you as invaders of their country and they were defending it?

Odds are that was the case and they had no military to a superpower.

Invaders of their country? I don't believe so. I am hardly an expert, but I do think I have a unique perspective. Everything I experienced was tied to their religion. Allah was the center of everything they did - from their morning prayers to planting IED's, to VBIED's. I had an awesome (and terrifying) experience of "living" with Iraqi families on my missions for 3-5 days. In that time I was able to gain a greater understanding (and respect) of the average Iraqi. Most don't like the West, but aren't violent. Actually, I found that generally they like Americans individually, but do not like America if that makes sense. They also really didn't care too much about "Iraq." I will say that when I was there, the Sunnis were just figuring out that they no longer had power.

A few anecdotes - I had a young Iraqi, 7 perhaps, tell me he couldn't wait to grow up and kill Americans. Not sure how the could be the result of nationalism. Another one - the local shake in a "suburb" north of Fallujah where I was working, blasted over the mosque's loudspeakers that my team was sent by teh debil, and that "we crawled out of the cracks of hell as spiders"...seriously. lolwut??? My point is that in no way did I ever get the impression that they were protecting their country. The impression I got was they did this because of some weird interpretation of the Koran.

A final disclaimer - I was almost exclusively in Sunni areas, so I don't have much perspective from the Shia side of things.

ForeverChiefs58

07-24-2011, 12:22 PM

That's all well and good. But the fact that I and no-one that I have met in my life hasn't bothered to know his name much less follow him should tell you how irrelevant he is to regular folks in the "Islamic world." Do not believe what you read about radical "leaders" because they are only leaders to the "radical" portion of any group.

So, neither you, nor anyone you have ever met in your life has ever supported Fatah or the PLO?

Frankie

07-24-2011, 12:26 PM

Ahhhh. Just because you didn't know his name doesn't mean you didn't get strung along from his teachings which were highly regarded among muslims. If you ever bought in to "resistance", you bought in to his teachings.

Up until you mentioned him I had no idea who this guy was. Nor did I care to know. All folks that I know don't care to know him much less admire him either.

If we, in your words, "ever bought in to "resistance"" it was because there was in our opinion gross injustice perpetrated after WWII involving some of the poorest people of the planet with no voice and the world for the most part has looked the other way. It was a conclusion based on reasoning, not religion or some nut's interpretations of it.

Frankie

07-24-2011, 12:29 PM

So, neither you, nor anyone you have ever met in your life has ever supported Fatah or the PLO?

No. At least not the way you think. There was sympathy about the helpless and the voiceless getting any help. But there were absolutely no support for the way Al Fattah was operating.

go bowe

07-24-2011, 12:32 PM

Muslim is the youngest of the Jehovah religions. The oldest, Judaism, has always suffered at the hands of polytheistic and atheistic others. As far as I know, other than a few minor eras in the Palestinian lands over a relatively minor number of people, they have never been ones to force others to their faith or try to eradicate those who disagreed. Christians saw Judaism as a big threat and did just that for a couple of centuries while at the same time trying to subjugate Muslims with the Crusades. I understand the painful growth of the Muslim Faith.

HOWEVER, while the Muslims seem to have no problem finding hateful leaders to speak out in anger and violence against others and state their voice is the one of leadership, there have been no diametrically opposed voices of similar stature in the Muslim world against those pigs. The leaders of Baptist, Catholic, and Protestant faiths have spoke out against acts of violence perpetrated in the name of their faith. And their are no major leaders of Christianity or Judaism who rail against others and promise death in our modern era.

The Islamic faith needs to stand up and denounce the bin Laden's of this planet. Instead we get smarmy groups like "The Brotherhood of Islam" who have an outward cast of benevolence yet actually plot the assassination and murder of those opposed to their will behind closed doors.

Islam is general a peaceful organization in civilized societies, but I see no real leadership attempting to change it from a murderous tool in most third world nations.

the key word here is murderous...

in nations with large active radical groups, speaking out can get you killed...

KCWolfman

07-24-2011, 12:37 PM

the key word here is murderous...

in nations with large active radical groups, speaking out can get you killed...
Yup, that is true.

However, the Islamic leaders of the first world nations can certainly make a voice against such scum and they can start propoganda campaigns against such people - neither of which they do.

go bowe

07-24-2011, 12:38 PM

So, neither you, nor anyone you have ever met in your life has ever supported Fatah or the PLO?

depends on the meaning of is...

er..., the meaning of support, that is...

donate to their cause, join them in their struggle, employ terrorists? no, i don't think i would do any of that...

is being sympathetic to the plight of people (on both sides) who are living a kind of hell supporting them?

if so, i am guilty...

go bowe

07-24-2011, 12:41 PM

Yup, that is true.

However, the Islamic leaders of the first world nations can certainly make a voice against such scum and they can start propoganda campaigns against such people - neither of which they do.

actually, listo had a great link to all sorts of muslim organizations and officials who have strongly condemned radicalism and terrorist acts, and who do so every time there is a major attack...

just because it's not in the news at communist news network or fox doesn't mean that it's not going on, it just means that so few people give a damn what any muslims have to say that it isn't newsworthy...

actually, listo had a great link to all sorts of muslim organizations and officials who have strongly condemned radicalism and terrorist acts, and who do so every time there is a major attack...

just because it's not in the news at communist news network or fox doesn't mean that it's not going on, it just means that so few people give a damn what any muslims have to say that it isn't newsworthy...

I have no doubt MANY Muslims have spoke out against such actions. The LEADERS have failed to do so. Don't you believe that recognizing Yassar Arafat as a leader of a nation in the UN was an incorrect action? Don't you believe that having Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as a voice of his nation is a detriment to Muslims everywhere? Instead of leaders speaking out against death you have a President who illegally funded terrorists and gave money to the family of suicide terrorists and another who has openly mentioned eradication and denial of mass genocide representing another Pro-Islamic nation.

These are the voices of Islam (right or wrong), these are the voices we get transmitted over here. They carry much more weight than the Jerry Falwell's of the Islamic world. The actual LEADERS need to decry their actions AND put in actual plans to take the power away from the crazed zealots.

go bowe

07-24-2011, 01:14 PM

I have no doubt MANY Muslims have spoke out against such actions. The LEADERS have failed to do so. Don't you believe that recognizing Yassar Arafat as a leader of a nation in the UN was an incorrect action? Don't you believe that having Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as a voice of his nation is a detriment to Muslims everywhere? Instead of leaders speaking out against death you have a President who illegally funded terrorists and gave money to the family of suicide terrorists and another who has openly mentioned eradication and denial of mass genocide representing another Pro-Islamic nation.

These are the voices of Islam (right or wrong), these are the voices we get transmitted over here. They carry much more weight than the Jerry Falwell's of the Islamic world. The actual LEADERS need to decry their actions AND put in actual plans to take the power away from the crazed zealots.

i don't agree, i think many leaders in the islamic world have condemned these attacks and others like it...

i don't think arafat was ever the leader of a nation (that's kinda what the palesitian-iraeli conflict is about) and ahmanutjob only speaks for the ayatollah and the revolutionary guard...

as far as taking power away from crazed zealots, we haven't been able to do it in afghanistan with over a hundred thousands troops and untold treasure that we can ill-afford over the course of 10 years...

how would you propose that leaders of moderate muslim countries accomplish what which we could not? seriously, what would you have them do to take power away from the radicals?

mnchiefsguy

07-24-2011, 01:23 PM

i don't agree, i think many leaders in the islamic world have condemned these attacks and others like it...

i don't think arafat was ever the leader of a nation (that's kinda what the palesitian-iraeli conflict is about) and ahmanutjob only speaks for the ayatollah and the revolutionary guard...

as far as taking power away from crazed zealots, we haven't been able to do it in afghanistan with over a hundred thousands troops and untold treasure that we can ill-afford over the course of 10 years...

how would you propose that leaders of moderate muslim countries accomplish what which we could not? seriously, what would you have them do to take power away from the radicals?

Well, for starters, the most powerful of the Muslim clerics, the ones in Saudi Arabia, the ones in Mecca and Medina need to condemn these terrorists. The Muslims that have been vocal against terrorism having been lower to mid-level clerics. The most powerful clerics, the ones equivalent to Bishops and the Pope in Catholicism for example, need to start condemning these terrorist..and start excommunicating them out of Islam all together. A terrorist might think twice about strapping a bomb to himself if he knew the most power cleric in his religion was going to excommunicate him and send him to hell. Instead these clerics proclaim them to be defenders of the faith, and promise them heaven and 72 virgins.

KCWolfman

07-24-2011, 01:33 PM

i don't agree, i think many leaders in the islamic world have condemned these attacks and others like it...

i don't think arafat was ever the leader of a nation (that's kinda what the palesitian-iraeli conflict is about) and ahmanutjob only speaks for the ayatollah and the revolutionary guard...

as far as taking power away from crazed zealots, we haven't been able to do it in afghanistan with over a hundred thousands troops and untold treasure that we can ill-afford over the course of 10 years...

how would you propose that leaders of moderate muslim countries accomplish what which we could not? seriously, what would you have them do to take power away from the radicals?
Arafat was the President of Palestine and recognized by the united nations as such.

The leaders of your enemy can do nothing to destroy moral. The leaders of fellow religious nations most certainly could.

ForeverChiefs58

07-24-2011, 01:37 PM

Up until you mentioned him I had no idea who this guy was. Nor did I care to know. All folks that I know don't care to know him much less admire him either.

If we, in your words, "ever bought in to "resistance"" it was because there was in our opinion gross injustice perpetrated after WWII involving some of the poorest people of the planet with no voice and the world for the most part has looked the other way. It was a conclusion based on reasoning, not religion or some nut's interpretations of it.

It is too bad you view me as "the other side" because that is exactly what I am talking about. Open your eyes and see. "Resistance" and "injustice was being preached for one purpose only, and it wasn't to help some of the poorist people on earth. Right down to today, the leadership there doesn't give two shits about those people, if they did they would do what was best for the people instead of looking after themselves. The world wants to help, not look the other way, but the leadership's cause isn't to help the people, but to hurt those who oppose with violence. That is the real injustice.

Do you need examples?

The Husseinis were one of the richest and most powerful families of all, yet through them came all the violence. They didn't care to help the poor, instead al-Husseini and later his nephew Arafat fed the people with this BS, and they ate it up. Talk about injustice.

Arafat picked up right where his uncle left off and started Fatah (Palestine National Liberation Movement an acronym meaning ‘conquest’) whose stated goal was the obliteration of the State of Israel with logo of rifles and grenades over Israel. (How about a loaf of bread over people trying to grab it for a logo?)

The violence against Israeli civilians came the Palestinian National Covenant (the foundational charter of the Palestinian Liberation Organization – PLO), which states that ‘the liberation of Palestine will destroy the Zionist and imperialist presence’ and that ‘armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine and is therefore a strategy and not a tactic.’

Where is anyone with ANY leadership trying to help the poor? Shouldn't THAT be somones goal?
A speech by Arafat summed it up best when he once said ‘People aren’t attracted to speeches, but rather to bullets.’

The rest of the civilized world rightfully so is not about to give ANYTHING to anyone whose main goal is violence and deceiving their own people.

go bowe

07-24-2011, 02:20 PM

Well, for starters, the most powerful of the Muslim clerics, the ones in Saudi Arabia, the ones in Mecca and Medina need to condemn these terrorists. The Muslims that have been vocal against terrorism having been lower to mid-level clerics. The most powerful clerics, the ones equivalent to Bishops and the Pope in Catholicism for example, need to start condemning these terrorist..and start excommunicating them out of Islam all together. A terrorist might think twice about strapping a bomb to himself if he knew the most power cleric in his religion was going to excommunicate him and send him to hell. Instead these clerics proclaim them to be defenders of the faith, and promise them heaven and 72 virgins.

can you be excommunicated out of the islamic faith?

i never heard that one before...

the problem is that sometimes people confuse mainstream muslim clerics with the nutjobs that have cast their lot with the terrorists...

mulsim clerics and leaders world-wide have consistently condemned terror attacks, despite the lack of coverage in the u.s. press...

and muslim clerics do not have any particular hierarchy of authority that would allow for them to excommunicate or in any other way control terrorists' actions...

if they did have such power, they would have used it already because most of the casualties from terrorists nowadays are muslims in pakistan and afghanistan...

go bowe

07-24-2011, 02:26 PM

Arafat was the President of Palestine and recognized by the united nations as such.

The leaders of your enemy can do nothing to destroy moral. The leaders of fellow religious nations most certainly could.

you may be right, but i thought arafat was the president of the plo and then the palestinian authority...

i don't think palestine has been a country, recognized by the un or not, in the modern era, if at all...

mnchiefsguy

07-24-2011, 02:37 PM

can you be excommunicated out of the islamic faith?

i never heard that one before...

the problem is that sometimes people confuse mainstream muslim clerics with the nutjobs that have cast their lot with the terrorists...

mulsim clerics and leaders world-wide have consistently condemned terror attacks, despite the lack of coverage in the u.s. press...

and muslim clerics do not have any particular hierarchy of authority that would allow for them to excommunicate or in any other way control terrorists' actions...

if they did have such power, they would have used it already because most of the casualties from terrorists nowadays are muslims in pakistan and afghanistan...

I do not know if one can be formally excommunicated from Islam or not. But the top clerics in Islam have not condemned these terrorists. This is like the Pope deny the sex scandal in the Catholic church...until the top leaders of Islam start acknowledging that these radicals are terrorists, and not martyrs entitled to virgins, nothing is going to change. There is no formal hierarchy...from what I can tell, but the most influential of the clerics appear to be from Saudi Arabia, and those clerics did not even condemn Osama (probably due to pressure from the Saudi government)

mnchiefsguy

07-24-2011, 02:51 PM

Here is an example (although it is dated, it is from 2002) of the highest rank Sunni cleric in the world comparing Jews to apes and pigs. While there might not be a strict hierarchy within the Muslim cleric community..when this guy talks, Sunni Muslims listen. These type of clerics are the ones who have been neutral or outright supports of terrorism and extermination of the Jews and other non-Muslims, and they are the ones who should be condemning this sort of thing. If the Pope used this type of language he would lambasted for it far and wide:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/memrireport.html

And before Frankie even says it..how is the highest ranking Sunni Muslim cleric in the world part of the radical fringe? One would certainly argue that he is not....

Frankie

07-24-2011, 03:09 PM

Yup, that is true.

However, the Islamic leaders of the first world nations can certainly make a voice against such scum and they can start propoganda campaigns against such people - neither of which they do.
In no small part it's because it would be akin to you or I making a big sign against skin heads and Neo-Nazis and walk right into their camp in the middle of an anti-Jewish/black gun frenzy. Nobody is arguing that radical elements with their crazy radical agenda has taken the stage in the Islamic world. We are arguing whether it's because of the religion itself or political developments in relatively recent history allowing/encouraging their rise.

The fact is they are there and their very radical justification of violence makes them very dangerous to be too vocal against. Nevertheless there are movements afoot and websites, etc that shows there are clear objections in the Islamic world to the radical element.

Frankie

07-24-2011, 03:13 PM

Well, for starters, the most powerful of the Muslim clerics, the ones in Saudi Arabia, the ones in Mecca and Medina need to condemn these terrorists.

Good luck with the Wahabis condemning that sh!t. Saudi Arabia is one of the main centers of Islamic radicalism.

go bowe

07-24-2011, 03:14 PM

Here is an example (although it is dated, it is from 2002) of the highest rank Sunni cleric in the world comparing Jews to apes and pigs. While there might not be a strict hierarchy within the Muslim cleric community..when this guy talks, Sunni Muslims listen. These type of clerics are the ones who have been neutral or outright supports of terrorism and extermination of the Jews and other non-Muslims, and they are the ones who should be condemning this sort of thing. If the Pope used this type of language he would lambasted for it far and wide:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/memrireport.html

And before Frankie even says it..how is the highest ranking Sunni Muslim cleric in the world part of the radical fringe? One would certainly argue that he is not....

ok, sworn enemies of the terrorists and palestinians in general say this guy is the most important cleric in the world, like some kind of pope?

and this is surprising?

there is no most important cleric in the muslim world, each sect of which there are many has it's own clerics that say what their audiences want to hear...

saudi arabia has a huge population of salafi islamists, fundamental 10th century types with a perverted view of islam...

that clerics in salafi mosques would say such things is no surprise either...

both have their own reasons for the claims they make, few of which should be taken without a grain of salt...

go bowe

07-24-2011, 03:16 PM

Good luck with the Wahabis condemning that sh!t. Saudi Arabia is one of the main centers of Islamic radicalism.

see?

i should have gone to school in iran, i would be able to say things succinctly instead of rambling on and on... :) :) :)

ForeverChiefs58

07-24-2011, 03:19 PM

you may be right, but i thought arafat was the president of the plo and then the palestinian authority...

i don't think palestine has been a country, recognized by the un or not, in the modern era, if at all...

You are correct. In 1974, he became the first representative of a nongovernmental organization to address a session of the UN General Assembly. In the speech, with a gun holster strapped to his hip, Arafat compared himself to George Washington and Abraham Lincoln. Arab heads of states declared the PLO the sole legitimate representative of all Palestinians, the PLO was granted full membership in the Arab League in 1976, and by 1980was fully recognized by European nations.

The real irony was Arafat wasn't even a part of the Palestinian movement, or a refugee as he claimed to be. He was from Egypt, and to the very end he employed an aide to translate his Egyptian dialect into Palestinian Arabic for conversing with his West Bank and Gaza subjects.

Frankie

07-24-2011, 03:20 PM

It is too bad you view me as "the other side" because that is exactly what I am talking about. Open your eyes and see. "Resistance" and "injustice was being preached for one purpose only, and it wasn't to help some of the poorist people on earth. Right down to today, the leadership there doesn't give two shits about those people, if they did they would do what was best for the people instead of looking after themselves.

I have never disagreed with that. And that's exactly my point. These people have seen nothing but some lip service about their plight. So when they see a "terrorist" act, it's easy to see it as some 'action' done on their behalf. It's easy to mistake terrorism for heroism under their situation. That's EXACTLY what groups like Hamas who have their "political" agenda count on for support.

ForeverChiefs58

07-24-2011, 03:39 PM

I believe Jordan is one of the only countries to really heartfully stand up to terrorists and say enough is enough even when it was very unpopular to do so. They changed the landscape of terrorists and even though it has been awhile since they tried they could make a major impact once again. I beleive that is what is missing again.

KCWolfman

07-24-2011, 04:04 PM

In no small part it's because it would be akin to you or I making a big sign against skin heads and Neo-Nazis and walk right into their camp in the middle of an anti-Jewish/black gun frenzy. Nobody is arguing that radical elements with their crazy radical agenda has taken the stage in the Islamic world. We are arguing whether it's because of the religion itself or political developments in relatively recent history allowing/encouraging their rise.

The fact is they are there and their very radical justification of violence makes them very dangerous to be too vocal against. Nevertheless there are movements afoot and websites, etc that shows there are clear objections in the Islamic world to the radical element.

The reason the Crusades and the Inquisitions stopped are BECAUSE good Christians took risks and spoke out.

Do you truly expect the violence to stop if people of the better side of Islamic faith are silent because they are scared? Doesn't that concept actually degrade their faith in Allah, Mohammed, and all each taught?

FWIW - Skinheads and Neo-Nazis have never assumed majority control just because white Christians refuse to allow them power of control over the majority of White Christian voice. Islamics have the same opportunity, they just have failed to take rein of it, so far. I only hope it doesn't take them hundreds of years to do so as it did Christians, because each moment they take instills and improves foundation on prejudices against them from civilized communities.

KCWolfman

07-24-2011, 04:07 PM

I do not know if one can be formally excommunicated from Islam or not. But the top clerics in Islam have not condemned these terrorists. This is like the Pope deny the sex scandal in the Catholic church...until the top leaders of Islam start acknowledging that these radicals are terrorists, and not martyrs entitled to virgins, nothing is going to change. There is no formal hierarchy...from what I can tell, but the most influential of the clerics appear to be from Saudi Arabia, and those clerics did not even condemn Osama (probably due to pressure from the Saudi government)

They can be declared Fakir by a rite of Takfir. Basically that means they can be called non-believers by the major sect of Islam. If they disagree, they can still participate in rites associated with Islam, but it is a slap in the face - one of which (once again) major leaders of the world have failed to do even with someone as pure evil as Usama bin Laden.

KCWolfman

07-24-2011, 04:09 PM

In no small part it's because it would be akin to you or I making a big sign against skin heads and Neo-Nazis and walk right into their camp in the middle of an anti-Jewish/black gun frenzy. Nobody is arguing that radical elements with their crazy radical agenda has taken the stage in the Islamic world. We are arguing whether it's because of the religion itself or political developments in relatively recent history allowing/encouraging their rise.

The fact is they are there and their very radical justification of violence makes them very dangerous to be too vocal against. Nevertheless there are movements afoot and websites, etc that shows there are clear objections in the Islamic world to the radical element.
What do you consider a realistic percentage of Islamic followers to move from what you call "radical extremists" to "mainstream"? I would say that number is awful close right now if the majority of the 2 billion Islams of the planet are not radical yet are scared to speak against the radical contingent.

KCWolfman

07-24-2011, 04:11 PM

Good luck with the Wahabis condemning that sh!t. Saudi Arabia is one of the main centers of Islamic radicalism.

MY POINT EXACTLY. The leaders of the Islamic faith do not condemn the "radicals" not because of fear, but because many are in bed with the radicals.

Frankie

07-24-2011, 04:44 PM

The reason the Crusades and the Inquisitions stopped are BECAUSE good Christians took risks and spoke out.

True, but it probably took a century or two. Be patient (in historical terms ;))

Frankie

07-24-2011, 04:47 PM

MY POINT EXACTLY. The leaders of the Islamic faith do not condemn the "radicals" not because of fear, but because many are in bed with the radicals.

The leaders you are referring to ARE Wahabis. That's one of the most fundamentalist, radicalized factions in the Islamic world.

KCWolfman

07-24-2011, 04:47 PM

True, but it probably took a century or two. Be patient (in historical terms ;))

Being patient is a term to be used by both sides. It is a simple equation, if you want to remove the prejudice, remove the issue.

If fundamental Islamics don't want to be seen as radicals, they will have to speak against them, regardless of risk, until the radicals finally are defined by other terms than simply olive skinned religious males.

Nothing good attained is easily attained.

KCWolfman

07-24-2011, 04:49 PM

The leaders you are referring to ARE Wahabis. That's one of the most fundamentalist, radicalized factions in the Islamic world.

And more importantly, Islamic LEADERS.

Frankie

07-24-2011, 04:50 PM

What do you consider a realistic percentage of Islamic followers to move from what you call "radical extremists" to "mainstream"?

I don't know. All I know is most Islamic countries have a great number of people who are in dire straits economically and denied proper education socially. That combination is the main part of the recipe for radicalism.

Frankie

07-24-2011, 04:52 PM

Being patient is a term to be used by both sides. It is a simple equation, if you want to remove the prejudice, remove the issue.

If fundamental Islamics don't want to be seen as radicals, they will have to speak against them, regardless of risk, until the radicals finally are defined by other terms than simply olive skinned religious males.

Nothing good attained is easily attained.

I'm actually enjoying our debate. I don't agree with all you say, but thanks.

KCWolfman

07-24-2011, 04:58 PM

I don't know. All I know is most Islamic countries have a great number of people who are in dire straits economically and denied proper education socially. That combination is the main part of the recipe for radicalism.

Yup, that is the exact reason that Communism took hold and held terror for almost a century.

Is that the path that you would like to see Islam take? Shouldn't the leaders of nations and religion be aware of history and instead of trying to garner power bases be instead focused on improving the world perception of their faith?

Jenson71

07-24-2011, 05:25 PM

The reason the Crusades and the Inquisitions stopped are BECAUSE good Christians took risks and spoke out.

The motivations behind the Crusades remained popular to the end of the final crusade and beyond. They ended because they weren't working.

KCWolfman

07-24-2011, 05:30 PM

The motivations behind the Crusades remained popular to the end of the final crusade and beyond. They ended because they weren't working.

If they ended because they weren't working they would have ended a great deal sooner. Only the First Crusade was "successful". The looting of other lands without having to occupy the lands appealed to the rulers of Western Europe. They were Renaissance Vikings.

The Popes who led the crusades lost their backing because the general population saw nothing but death, loss, and atrocities. The rulers of Western Europe realized this and followed the mindset of the local population as opposed to the rule of the Popes.

Jenson71

07-24-2011, 05:33 PM

If they ended because they weren't working they would have ended a great deal sooner. Only the First Crusade was "successful". The looting of other lands without having to occupy the lands appealed to the rulers of Western Europe. They were Renaissance Vikings.

The Popes who led the crusades lost their backing because the general population saw nothing but death, loss, and atrocities. The rulers of Western Europe realized this and followed the mindset of the local population as opposed to the rule of the Popes.

Are you intentionally making this up as you go, or is this the scrambled remnants of something you think you learned 25 years ago? Because none of this is right.

Frankie

07-24-2011, 05:36 PM

Yup, that is the exact reason that Communism took hold and held terror for almost a century. Nothing in it's extreme form should be allowed to take over and rule over people. Where you will most likely disagree with me is that I include extreme capitalism in that assessment as well. But that's material for another thread.

Is that the path that you would like to see Islam take? Shouldn't the leaders of nations and religion be aware of history and instead of trying to garner power bases be instead focused on improving the world perception of their faith?
My initial reaction to your question is yes. But the way the effectiveness of "the leaders" will change is that people are motivated to be educated about the benefits of having moderate leaders as opposed to radical ones.

But the poor, the voiceless, and desperate is hard to convince to be educated when they are the poor, the voiceless, and desperate. It's an enigma. I have always pushed, here, for the necessity of the more well to do nations take the PR market from the radicals by showing, by deed, the globally disenfranchised that they are out to actually help them. That would be hard against a history of these folks losing land, resources, and dignity to the very same folks who might genuinely want to help now. Hard, but certainly doable.

KCWolfman

07-24-2011, 05:51 PM

Are you intentionally making this up as you go, or is this the scrambled remnants of something you think you learned 25 years ago? Because none of this is right.

Still bitter after all these years? I guess its true that some old dogs can't learn any new tricks.

http://www.middle-ages.org.uk/end-of-medieval-crusades.htm
"Reasons why the Crusades Failed
Reasons why the crusades failed. Of the many reasons for the failure of the crusades, three require special consideration. In the first place, there was the inability of eastern and western Europe to cooperate in supporting the holy wars. A united Christendom might well have been invincible. But the bitter antagonism between the Greek and Roman churches effectually prevented all unity of action. The emperors at Constantinople, after the First Crusade, rarely assisted the crusaders and often secretly hindered them. In the second place, the lack of sea-power, as seen in the earlier crusades, worked against their success. Instead of being able to go by water directly to Syria, it was necessary to follow the long, overland route from France or Germany through Hungary, Bulgaria, the territory of the Roman Empire in the East, and the deserts and mountains of Asia Minor. The armies that reached their destination after this toilsome march were in no condition for effective campaigning. In the third place, the crusaders were never numerous enough to colonize so large a country as Syria and absorb its Moslem population. They conquered part of Syria in the First Crusade, but could not hold it permanently in the face of determined resistance.

Why the Crusades ended
Why the Crusades stopped. In spite of the above reasons the Christians of Europe might have continued much longer their efforts to recover the Holy Land, had they not lost faith in the movement. But after two centuries the old crusading enthusiasm died out, the old ideal of the crusade as "the way of God" lost its spell. Men had begun to think less of winning future salvation by visits to distant shrines and to think more of their present duties to the world about them. They came to believe that Jerusalem could best be won as Christ and the Apostles had won it "by love, by prayers, and by the shedding of tears."

ForeverChiefs58

07-24-2011, 07:04 PM

I don't know. All I know is most Islamic countries have a great number of people who are in dire straits economically and denied proper education socially. That combination is the main part of the recipe for radicalism.

That is the point. They have been lead in the wrong direction and for the wrong reasons first by al-Husseini, then by Arafat. That family did nothing but set back the "real" palestinians (Arafat was actually Egyptian) and muslims in general because they sewed so many seeds of hate, violence, radicalism, Jew hating fanatical anti-Zionist zealots, and it caught on like wildfire throughout the muslim world. It would be equivelant to Hitler and his family running Germany for a 100 years.

It is hard to fathum why this worked for so long.

I would guess the real question is: How many generations will it take to undo Arafat’s very, very dark legacy?

ForeverChiefs58

07-24-2011, 07:11 PM

Taliban Hang Eight Year-Old Boy

Taliban hit bottom, keep digging again – but Obama and Cameron still want to talk to them:

Suspected Taliban militants hanged an eight-year-old boy in southern Afghanistan after ordering his father, a local police commander, to surrender, a government spokesman says.

The child was kidnapped by militants in Greshk district of the southern province of Helmand four days ago and was hanged on Friday, provincial governor spokesman Daud Ahmadi said on Saturday.

“The militants had warned his father, who is a local police commander, to surrender with his police vehicle and weapons, otherwise they would kill his son,” Ahmad said.

The Taliban have not commented.

After being driven from power in late 2001, Taliban militants have killed dozens of people accused of spying.

Last year a seven-year old boy was killed by the Taliban for being a spy for foreign soldiers in the same province.

They also confiscated a drug cache of 2000 kilograms of poppy, six kilograms of heroin, 50 kilograms of hashish and 150 kilograms of morphine, as well as 20 kilograms of ammonium nitrate, which is used as an explosive component.

They are the Taliban. Drug Dealers and child murderers for Allah.

http://undhimmi.com/2011/07/24/taliban-hang-eight-year-old-boy/

LiveSteam

07-24-2011, 07:12 PM

In no small part it's because it would be akin to you or I making a big sign against skin heads and Neo-Nazis and walk right into their camp in the middle of an anti-Jewish/black gun frenzy. Nobody is arguing that radical elements with their crazy radical agenda has taken the stage in the Islamic world. We are arguing whether it's because of the religion itself or political developments in relatively recent history allowing/encouraging their rise.

The fact is they are there and their very radical justification of violence makes them very dangerous to be too vocal against. Nevertheless there are movements afoot and websites, etc that shows there are clear objections in the Islamic world to the radical element.

You have more fucking excuses for your peoples BULL SHIT! Than Linzy Lohan, Paris Hilton combined. Id throw Anna Nicole Smith in there to. But she dead.

mnchiefsguy

07-24-2011, 07:21 PM

ok, sworn enemies of the terrorists and palestinians in general say this guy is the most important cleric in the world, like some kind of pope?

and this is surprising?

there is no most important cleric in the muslim world, each sect of which there are many has it's own clerics that say what their audiences want to hear...

saudi arabia has a huge population of salafi islamists, fundamental 10th century types with a perverted view of islam...

that clerics in salafi mosques would say such things is no surprise either...

both have their own reasons for the claims they make, few of which should be taken without a grain of salt...

Sorry, I gotta call bullshit on this one. There is no leading cleric of the Islamic world? There are just as many, if not more, different sects of Christianity...but when the Pope, or the leader of the Southern Baptists, or just some plain Joe off of the street says anything, folks like you and Frankie claim they speak for all Christians. But no, no, no....leading clerics in Islam don't speak for even their own sects...so when the promise suicide bombers 72 virgins and a spot in paradise, I suppose they are just talking out of their ass? And Saudi Arabia, which is considered to be one of the most conservative Muslim countries on the planet, is now just a bunch of radicals? Despite the fact that their government is completely stable, they have a good relationship with the west, and they are not on any lists for state sponsored terrorists, like Iran and Syria are, and like Iraq was when Saddam was in charge.

And I don't care if these clerics are just saying what their audiences want to hear...that is not the role of a cleric, or any religious leader. Their role is to guide their flock the best the can to assure their people eternal salvation...even if that means saying unpopular things. They are the moral compasses of their people....so when they promise bombers virgins and paradise, which way do you think their moral compass is pointing?

Are Muslims religious leaders responsible for anything?

HonestChieffan

07-24-2011, 07:36 PM

Are Muslims religious leaders responsible for anything?

Stoning
Denial of rights for anyone not just like them
Helping their people live in the 7th century
High quality Poppy Farming advancements
Killing lots of innocent people with martyrs
Leading the effort to exterminate Christians and Jews
Marriage of little girls
Diddling small boys

Jenson71

07-24-2011, 08:05 PM

Still bitter after all these years? I guess its true that some old dogs can't learn any new tricks.

What could I possibly be bitter about? You being ignorant doesn't make me bitter. Now, I have to laugh at you thinking that quotation proved much of what you said. But, if you think you need to argue, we can go over this.

"If they ended because they weren't working they would have ended a great deal sooner. Only the First Crusade was "successful". The looting of other lands without having to occupy the lands appealed to the rulers of Western Europe. They were Renaissance Vikings.

The Popes who led the crusades lost their backing because the general population saw nothing but death, loss, and atrocities. The rulers of Western Europe realized this and followed the mindset of the local population as opposed to the rule of the Popes."

First of all, your eras are messed up by calling Western leaders during the Crusades "Renaissance Vikings." The Renaissance occurred 250-500 years after the Crusades. If you can't get the basic timeline of Western Civilization down, I have little hope that you can provide any sort of decent analysis on the events that occurred during that timeline.

Secondly, the Popes didn't lose any support when they led the charge. Especially from the general population, who remained enthralled with the tales of chivalry and miracles that came from the Crusades. Check out the Children's Crusade, which was a pack of idiot peasants, and the Pope told them to shut up and go home -- not crusade to the Holy Land.

Thirdly, and most importantly, the Crusades morphed overwhelmingly into secular struggles. Throughout the crusades, the Papacy turned into a secondary player, and the rulers became the impetus of following crusades. Your comment that rulers of Europe seemed to turn on the Pope and follow the local population's desires against the Crusades is incredibly ignorant and has no basis in historical reality. Good Lord. It's like saying King George III valiantly fought alongside George Washington in the Revolutionary War.

mnchiefsguy

07-24-2011, 08:16 PM

They can be declared Fakir by a rite of Takfir. Basically that means they can be called non-believers by the major sect of Islam. If they disagree, they can still participate in rites associated with Islam, but it is a slap in the face - one of which (once again) major leaders of the world have failed to do even with someone as pure evil as Usama bin Laden.

Well, if Bin Laden could not even get kicked out, then I think some of the responsibility of the creation of these radical sect must fall on the clerics and the Islamic religious leaders.

BucEyedPea

07-24-2011, 08:18 PM

Stoning
Some places still eat each other. Does that mean we invade?

Denial of rights for anyone not just like them.

There is such a thing as the right to self-determination, their religion and culture whether you agree with it or not.
Using America as a force for good in the world through invasions and dropping bombs as a tool of social engineering has a certain name.
Are you a international progressive now HCf? Sure sounds like it. Welcome to the left.

Let me see who else thought they were liberating the world or certain people? Napoleon, the Japanese circa WWII, the former Soviet Union.

Helping their people live in the 7th century
What about indigenous native tribes in some remote places who help their people live like they're in the Stone Age? Time to invade, drop some drones and wipe 'em out if we ca.

High quality Poppy Farming advancements
Ah no, that practice was done away with by the Taliban and was restored after the US went in.
Hey, the CIA has to be paid with off-budget money for some things.

Killing lots of innocent people with bombs and drones
We do this, though. May I ask what is right about it?

Leading the effort to exterminate Christians and Jews
Nah, they just want us off their lands.

What do drones and bombs do to them? Exterminate them.
Marriage of little girls

That was done in the west for thousands of years before too. This is really none of our business but reforming them with military invasions that kill those little girls isn't more noble than what you're trying to correct.

Diddling small boys

Some Christians have been found guilty of this too. Seriously you don't think that doesn't happen here?

Keep drinkin' the NeoCon Kool-Aid!

BucEyedPea

07-24-2011, 08:20 PM

Well, if Bin Laden could not even get kicked out, then I think some of the responsibility of the creation of these radical sect must fall on the clerics and the Islamic religious leaders.

You forgot US Foreign Policy that has been killin' their people for the past 20 years. The CIA calls this "blowback." Responsibility as blame without looking at some of our policies isn't going to improve things.

mnchiefsguy

07-24-2011, 08:25 PM

You forgot US Foreign Policy that has been killin' their people for the past 20 years. The CIA calls this "blowback." Responsibility as blame without looking at some of our policies isn't going to improve things.

US Foreign Policy has nothing to do with Islamic clerics doing the right thing and expelling a mass murderer from their ranks. You can spew all you want about causes, the CIA, and whatever, but the terrorists did what they did. NOTHING that had been done in the past justifies or excuses what they did. If we are going down that road, we could use 9/11 as a justification to destroy the arab world. After all, it would be their fault because they attacked us, right?

BucEyedPea

07-24-2011, 08:30 PM

US Foreign Policy has nothing to do with Islamic clerics doing the right thing and expelling a mass murderer from their ranks. You can spew all you want about causes, the CIA, and whatever, but the terrorists did what they did. NOTHING that had been done in the past justifies or excuses what they did. If we are going down that road, we could use 9/11 as a justification to destroy the arab world. After all, it would be their fault because they attacked us, right?

Nothing justifies what we've done over there either except when it is done clearly in self-defense and on the right target. We are making this worse and this has resulted in the longest war. It's a farce. You don't commit evil to correct it.

mnchiefsguy

07-24-2011, 08:40 PM

Nothing justifies what we've done over there either except when it is done clearly in self-defense and on the right target. We are making this worse and this has resulted in the longest war. It's a farce. You don't commit evil to correct it.

We are just going to have to agree to disagree. You seem to think that we somehow provoked 9/11 and share the blame for that horrible day. I disagree. There is nothing that the United States has done that warranted that attack. You want to equate the United States to radical Muslim savages, go right ahead, but I cannot agree with that conclusion.

Frankie

07-24-2011, 08:49 PM

There is nothing that the United States has done that warranted that attack.

I won't argue with that. But for the sake of argument let's change the word "warranted" to "provoked." The answer to that would then be that 2000 pounds would add up to ton. 9/11 was not provoked by one act from the West. But the whole history of the 20th century.

KCWolfman

07-24-2011, 08:59 PM

What could I possibly be bitter about? You being ignorant doesn't make me bitter. Now, I have to laugh at you thinking that quotation proved much of what you said. But, if you think you need to argue, we can go over this.

"If they ended because they weren't working they would have ended a great deal sooner. Only the First Crusade was "successful". The looting of other lands without having to occupy the lands appealed to the rulers of Western Europe. They were Renaissance Vikings.

The Popes who led the crusades lost their backing because the general population saw nothing but death, loss, and atrocities. The rulers of Western Europe realized this and followed the mindset of the local population as opposed to the rule of the Popes."

First of all, your eras are messed up by calling Western leaders during the Crusades "Renaissance Vikings." The Renaissance occurred 250-500 years after the Crusades. If you can't get the basic timeline of Western Civilization down, I have little hope that you can provide any sort of decent analysis on the events that occurred during that timeline.

Secondly, the Popes didn't lose any support when they led the charge. Especially from the general population, who remained enthralled with the tales of chivalry and miracles that came from the Crusades. Check out the Children's Crusade, which was a pack of idiot peasants, and the Pope told them to shut up and go home -- not crusade to the Holy Land.

Thirdly, and most importantly, the Crusades morphed overwhelmingly into secular struggles. Throughout the crusades, the Papacy turned into a secondary player, and the rulers became the impetus of following crusades. Your comment that rulers of Europe seemed to turn on the Pope and follow the local population's desires against the Crusades is incredibly ignorant and has no basis in historical reality. Good Lord. It's like saying King George III valiantly fought alongside George Washington in the Revolutionary War.
Ahh Jenson, you need no one to be bitter about, I don't place myself that high in your little aerie. You seem to be bitter without any outside source necessary.

You bring up the aberration of the Children's Crusade and still managed to get quite a bit wrong. I think Innocent was the Pope and while he did not sanction the journey led by Stephen of Cloyes out of France, he was not able to stop it as you stated he did. Those 30,000 children were told by Stephen the waters would part at Marseilles. They obviously did not, the children boarded a boat bound for parts east and were never heard from again. A few travelers mentioned they saw child slaves taken in the Holy Lands but it was not verified.

Maybe you meant the other mislabeled Childrens Crusade of 1212? That one was led by Nicholas out of Germany, but he had a great many adults in his gathering of 20,000. They met with the Pope (again I think it was Pope Innocent III) and he asked them to turn home. Calling either of these a true "Crusade" though is an extrapolation of realism to the extreme. The Childrens' Crusades were no more a part of the Crusades than the Shepherd's Crusade or the Tenth Crusade.

And there are many more articles I can quote which state the common man finally caused enough divisions between nations, and Kings vs. the Papacy because they were tired of dying and losing family while gaining nothing for themselves. Logistics and true Christianity are what finally killed the true Crusades.

However, I still stand by my statement Roger Bacon stated the wealthy got wealthier and the impoverished became bitter against the Christian leaders which caused the movement to finally die.

ForeverChiefs58

07-24-2011, 09:39 PM

I won't argue with that. But for the sake of argument let's change the word "warranted" to "provoked." The answer to that would then be that 2000 pounds would add up to ton. 9/11 was not provoked by one act from the West. But the whole history of the 20th century.

WTF???? This is a smelly bag of pig shit!!! FUCK YOU!!! If you are moderate, your religion is fucked!

One could also argue the sick, evil, smelly hand mother fuckers "hijacking" your religion of peace have warranted and provoked the rest of the civilized world to exterminate every mother fucking mosque from here to mecca. So fuck you in your hog hole!!!!!!!!!

Jenson71

07-24-2011, 10:11 PM

Ahh Jenson, you need no one to be bitter about, I don't place myself that high in your little aerie. You seem to be bitter without any outside source necessary.

You bring up the aberration of the Children's Crusade and still managed to get quite a bit wrong. I think Innocent was the Pope and while he did not sanction the journey led by Stephen of Cloyes out of France, he was not able to stop it as you stated he did. Those 30,000 children were told by Stephen the waters would part at Marseilles. They obviously did not, the children boarded a boat bound for parts east and were never heard from again. A few travelers mentioned they saw child slaves taken in the Holy Lands but it was not verified.

Maybe you meant the other mislabeled Childrens Crusade of 1212? That one was led by Nicholas out of Germany, but he had a great many adults in his gathering of 20,000. They met with the Pope (again I think it was Pope Innocent III) and he asked them to turn home. Calling either of these a true "Crusade" though is an extrapolation of realism to the extreme. The Childrens' Crusades were no more a part of the Crusades than the Shepherd's Crusade or the Tenth Crusade.

And there are many more articles I can quote which state the common man finally caused enough divisions between nations, and Kings vs. the Papacy because they were tired of dying and losing family while gaining nothing for themselves. Logistics and true Christianity are what finally killed the true Crusades.

However, I still stand by my statement Roger Bacon stated the wealthy got wealthier and the impoverished became bitter against the Christian leaders which caused the movement to finally die.

As you scramble around the internet to find information about something you really have no idea about, let me just point out the frustrating reality with arguing on the internet: not only can people be ignorant, they make up stuff that the opponent said. For instance, this line: ". . . he was not able to stop it as you stated he did."

You think it was Pope Innocent III? You're such a fraud here, and adding these intentionally humbling remarks, as if you've studied this up to recall offhand "Stephen of Coyles" but can't remember, "Oh dear, was it Innocent II or III or perhaps an Urban", is pathetically obvious. You're a rookie.

I'd love to see your internet articles about how kings forced the Papacy to end the Crusades by listening to the "true Christian" peasants. Go on, fetch, you fake.

KCWolfman

07-24-2011, 10:16 PM

As you scramble around the internet to find information about something you really have no idea about, let me just point out the frustrating reality with arguing on the internet: not only can people be ignorant, they make up stuff that the opponent said. For instance, this line: ". . . he was not able to stop it as you stated he did."

I'd love to see your internet articles about how kings forced the Papacy to end the Crusades by listening to the "true Christian" peasants. Go on, fetch.

I don't remember specifically saying "kings forced the Papacy" to do anything. Perhaps you could find that original quote for me? I did say that the rulers of Eastern Europe agreed with the local gentry and peasantry and eventually opposed ideas set forth by the Papacy with future Crusades in mind. I never said they forced anything with a Pope, however. Maybe you misinterpreted what I stated? It wouldn't be the first time you have bent words to your own interpretation.

Fetch??? Not only are you bitter, you are still a petulant child.

Jenson71

07-24-2011, 10:28 PM

I don't remember specifically saying "kings forced the Papacy" to do anything. Perhaps you could find that original quote for me? I did say that the rulers of Eastern Europe agreed with the local gentry and peasantry and eventually opposed ideas set forth by the Papacy with future Crusades in mind. I never said they forced anything with a Pope, however. Maybe you misinterpreted what I stated? It wouldn't be the first time you have bent words to your own interpretation.

Fetch??? Not only are you bitter, you are still a petulant child.

Yes, you said as much here, rookie.

"The Popes who led the crusades lost their backing because the general population saw nothing but death, loss, and atrocities. The rulers of Western Europe realized this and followed the mindset of the local population as opposed to the rule of the Popes."

As in, the Papacy, strong with the crusader spirit, was forced to back off such notions when they lost the support of the kings who listened to their peasants and nobles.

That's an accurate phrase of what you've been saying.

Maybe you misinterpreted what you read on some internet site? Want to redo this whole thing and come back later when you've actually read a book or two or taken a class on the subject?

You're not the first person here who has tried to make up history, KCWolfman. My bullshit meter is easily triggered in this forum, where facts and analyses are too often never even given the chance of conception. It gets triggered when someone says a specific, random name like Stephen of Coyles, but doesn't know that the Renaissance occurred centuries after the first Crusaders took leave.

KCWolfman

07-24-2011, 10:41 PM

Yes, you said as much here, rookie.

As in, the Papacy, strong with the crusader spirit, was forced to back off such notions when they lost the support of the kings who listened to their peasants and nobles.

That's an accurate phrase of what you've been saying.

You know, I went back and read all I posted just in case I was wrong. That quote above is not mine at all. If you interpreted my meaning as thus, I am sorry.

Honestly, you aren't worth the effort. You want to attempt to humiliate those who disagree with you, more power to your little life. I am sure you get something out of it somehow.

I came back here to discuss in a friendly format. So head on back to your dimly candlelit corner with your turkish cigarette and finish your copy of "The Tasks of the Proletariat in the Present Revolution" without me.

A nice day and a good life to you.

Jenson71

07-24-2011, 10:47 PM

You know, I went back and read all I posted just in case I was wrong. That quote above is not mine at all. If you interpreted my meaning as thus, I am sorry.

That quote above comes from this quote, your first reply to me. Post 806 of this thread. If you did not write that, and instead, the other KCWolfman with the same avatar picture and signature did, then I think it's understandable why I misinterpreted.

If they ended because they weren't working they would have ended a great deal sooner. Only the First Crusade was "successful". The looting of other lands without having to occupy the lands appealed to the rulers of Western Europe. They were Renaissance Vikings.

The Popes who led the crusades lost their backing because the general population saw nothing but death, loss, and atrocities. The rulers of Western Europe realized this and followed the mindset of the local population as opposed to the rule of the Popes.

Honestly, you aren't worth the effort. You want to attempt to humiliate those who disagree with you, more power to your little life. I am sure you get something out of it somehow.

I came back here to discuss in a friendly format. So head on back to your dimly candlelit corner with your turkish cigarette and finish your copy of "The Tasks of the Proletariat in the Present Revolution" without me.

A nice day and a good life to you.

I don't apologize for taking history and its significance with the utmost seriousness, especially when it involves the reputation of the Catholic Church. Don't pout now. Just learn.

Frankie

07-24-2011, 10:56 PM

WTF???? This is a smelly bag of pig shit!!! **** YOU!!! If you are moderate, your religion is ****ed!

One could also argue the sick, evil, smelly hand mother ****ers "hijacking" your religion of peace have warranted and provoked the rest of the civilized world to exterminate every mother ****ing mosque from here to mecca. So **** you in your hog hole!!!!!!!!!

:shake:

Take your meds.

go bowe

07-24-2011, 11:14 PM

Sorry, I gotta call bullshit on this one. There is no leading cleric of the Islamic world? There are just as many, if not more, different sects of Christianity...but when the Pope, or the leader of the Southern Baptists, or just some plain Joe off of the street says anything, folks like you and Frankie claim they speak for all Christians. But no, no, no....leading clerics in Islam don't speak for even their own sects...so when the promise suicide bombers 72 virgins and a spot in paradise, I suppose they are just talking out of their ass? And Saudi Arabia, which is considered to be one of the most conservative Muslim countries on the planet, is now just a bunch of radicals? Despite the fact that their government is completely stable, they have a good relationship with the west, and they are not on any lists for state sponsored terrorists, like Iran and Syria are, and like Iraq was when Saddam was in charge.

And I don't care if these clerics are just saying what their audiences want to hear...that is not the role of a cleric, or any religious leader. Their role is to guide their flock the best the can to assure their people eternal salvation...even if that means saying unpopular things. They are the moral compasses of their people....so when they promise bombers virgins and paradise, which way do you think their moral compass is pointing?

Are Muslims religious leaders responsible for anything?
seriously?

people like me and frankie say nutjobs represent all christians?

are we reading different posts?

i have never said nutjobs represent anybody but nutjobs and certainly not all christians...

i don't think frankie has ever said that either but i'll let frankie speak for himself...

radical clerics in the me support radicals and promise them rewards for martyrdom, not mainstream muslim clerics, you're confusing the two...

as far as saudi arabia goes, yes their government is a reasonably good ally but they most certainly breed one of the most radical forms of islam, wahabi (i'm not spelling that right but you get the idea)...

whatever we may think of the role of clergy in the west, i still maintain that radical inmans preach martyrdom and jihad, but mainstream clerics do not...

Anders Behring Breivik, the man being held for Friday's shooting at an island off the coast of Norway, expressed anti-Islamic sentiments in English in the past and was an enthusiastic supporter of Israel, according to a Sunday-evening report by Channel 2 television. Breivik's 1,500 page book attacks the European political establishment because he sees it as an ally of the Muslims against Israel, and praises Israel for not giving Muslims the same rights they enjoy in different European countries.

Breivik says, "The time has come to stop the stupid support of the Palestinians...and to start supporting our cultural cousins - Israel." The sight of the massacre was a camp which demanded, days earlier, that Israel "finish the occupation." Anti-Israel, pro-Arab signs were hung in the camp. The death toll in the shooting and the explosion of a bomb in downtown Oslo stands at 93.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/Flash.aspx/215928

go bowe

07-24-2011, 11:22 PM

I won't argue with that. But for the sake of argument let's change the word "warranted" to "provoked." The answer to that would then be that 2000 pounds would add up to ton. 9/11 was not provoked by one act from the West. But the whole history of the 20th century.

oh shit, now you've gone and done it...

they'll be coming after us with pitchforks and burning bales of hay...

go bowe

07-24-2011, 11:29 PM

WTF???? This is a smelly bag of pig shit!!! FUCK YOU!!! If you are moderate, your religion is fucked!

One could also argue the sick, evil, smelly hand mother fuckers "hijacking" your religion of peace have warranted and provoked the rest of the civilized world to exterminate every mother fucking mosque from here to mecca. So fuck you in your hog hole!!!!!!!!!

see frankie? see what i mean?

btw i have to say hog hole is one i haven't heard before... :clap:

ForeverChiefs58

07-24-2011, 11:29 PM

:shake:

Take your meds.

How could you possible say we provoked 9/11? Our support for Israel?
Earlier you tried to say on this very thread that muslims didn't hate Jews at all you lying piece of shit son of a motherless goat!!

ForeverChiefs58

07-24-2011, 11:33 PM

see frankie? see what i mean?

btw i have to say hog hole is one i haven't heard before... :clap:

Thanks, I'll be here all night. Don't forget to tip your waitress! ;)

go bowe

07-24-2011, 11:34 PM

Thanks, I'll be here all night. Don't forget to tip your waitress! ;)

LMAO LMAO LMAO

ForeverChiefs58

07-24-2011, 11:40 PM

Anyone remember in 1970 ‘Black September‘, Palestinians hijacked four Western airliners and blew one up on a Cairo runway? They said it was done to both embarrass the Egyptians and Jordanians and, in their words, ‘teach the Americans a lesson for their long-standing support of Israel.’

I guess according to Frankie we should have been provoked enough to exterminate all muslims for their continued support for terrorism.

Frankie

07-25-2011, 12:11 AM

How could you possible say we provoked 9/11? Our support for Israel?
Earlier you tried to say on this very thread that muslims didn't hate Jews at all you lying piece of shit son of a motherless goat!!

Only your twisted mind comes to conclusions like this. Like I said, take your meds. If you are not on meds, why not? And shove your bogus I-had-a-rough-childhood-in-Africa up your ass.

You obviously need help, but as I told you before when I thought you were toning down your crazy rage act, you won't get it here. All you will get here is bogus support from the crazy video game addicts of "nuke'm-all" variety and bigots who use your shallow anger-filled posts to register pseudo-macho posts to compensate for their small dicks and their inferiority complex..

Frankie

07-25-2011, 12:15 AM

Anyone remember in 1970 ‘Black September‘, Palestinians hijacked four Western airliners and blew one up on a Cairo runway? They said it was done to both embarrass the Egyptians and Jordanians and, in their words, ‘teach the Americans a lesson for their long-standing support of Israel.’

I guess according to Frankie we should have been provoked enough to exterminate all muslims for their continued support for terrorism.

BEP has eloquently listed all the other reasons for the ME anger towards the West in this very thread. But all your rage-filled bigoted ignorance allows into your sick brain is just one reason.

ForeverChiefs58

07-25-2011, 12:20 AM

BEP has eloquently listed all the other reasons for the ME anger towards the West in this very thread. But all your rage-filled bigoted ignorance allows into your sick brain is just one reason.

May you get gang raped by a passel of hogs.

Jenson71

07-25-2011, 12:27 AM

So ForeverChief was raped by an African and now has anger towards Muslims and his psychiatric treatment has been complete shit. Any other important parts of the story?

Frankie

07-25-2011, 12:33 AM

So ForeverChief was raped by an African and now has anger towards Muslims and his psychiatric treatment has been complete shit. Any other important parts of the story?

Actually this is more believable than his bogus imagined "personal" story that he uses here to gain undeserved sympathy.

Evidently he really wants one of the resident pseudo-macho crazies here to offer him a shoulder to cry on and hope for more things to develop.

ForeverChiefs58

07-25-2011, 12:35 AM

Only your twisted mind comes to conclusions like this. Like I said, take your meds. If you are not on meds, why not? And shove your bogus I-had-a-rough-childhood-in-Africa up your ass.

You obviously need help, but as I told you before when I thought you were toning down your crazy rage act, you won't get it here. All you will get here is bogus support from the crazy video game addicts of "nuke'm-all" variety and bigots who use your shallow anger-filled posts to register pseudo-macho posts to compensate for their small dicks and their inferiority complex..

Actually this is more believable than his bogus imagined "personal" story that he uses here to gain undeserved sympathy.

Evidently he really wants one of the resident pseudo-macho crazies here to offer him a shoulder to cry on and hope for more things to develop.

And what proof do you offer that his story is false? I don't know about his story, only what I have red in other posts...that he was in the military and was stationed overseas in areas of the Muslim part of the world.

If you are going to call him a liar, you better have some proof of his dishonestly, or what little credibility you have on this board will be gone.

I know you are fired up to talk some smack with ForeverChiefs, but I think you crossed a big line with this comment.

Anders Behring Breivik, the man being held for Friday's shooting at an island off the coast of Norway, expressed anti-Islamic sentiments in English in the past and was an enthusiastic supporter of Israel, according to a Sunday-evening report by Channel 2 television. Breivik's 1,500 page book attacks the European political establishment because he sees it as an ally of the Muslims against Israel, and praises Israel for not giving Muslims the same rights they enjoy in different European countries.

Breivik says, "The time has come to stop the stupid support of the Palestinians...and to start supporting our cultural cousins - Israel." The sight of the massacre was a camp which demanded, days earlier, that Israel "finish the occupation." Anti-Israel, pro-Arab signs were hung in the camp. The death toll in the shooting and the explosion of a bomb in downtown Oslo stands at 93.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/Flash.aspx/215928
Unless we have underground videos from Bob Dole or David Cameron extolling the "virtues" of Brevik and stating a rightwing attack could happen again at any moment, I really don't think it scrambles anything.

One nutjob does not make a movement or radically change the current landscape.

ForeverChiefs58

07-25-2011, 01:10 AM

So ForeverChief was raped by an African and now has anger towards Muslims and his psychiatric treatment has been complete shit. Any other important parts of the story?

If you are going to call him a liar, you better have some proof of his dishonestly, or what little credibility you have on this board will be gone.

I know you are fired up to talk some smack with ForeverChiefs, but I think you crossed a big line with this comment.

Frankie and Jenson both really crossed a line with this shit.

Frankie

07-25-2011, 01:14 AM

And what proof do you offer that his story is false? I don't know about his story, only what I have red in other posts...that he was in the military and was stationed overseas in areas of the Muslim part of the world.

If you are going to call him a liar, you better have some proof of his dishonestly, or what little credibility you have on this board will be gone.

I know you are fired up to talk some smack with ForeverChiefs, but I think you crossed a big line with this comment.

I don't need any proof. His own posts give him away as a lying cry baby and a drama queen of the type who makes up bogus stories to get attention. "Oh I'm angry and demand genocide because I had a rough childhood!"

Let me grab my violin. :shake:

Jenson71

07-25-2011, 01:17 AM

Frankie and Jenson both really crossed a line with this shit.

LMAO You're so terribly the authority on crossing lines around here.

mnchiefsguy

07-25-2011, 01:18 AM

I don't need any proof. His own posts give him away as a lying cry baby and a drama queen of the type who makes up bogus stories to get attention. "Oh I'm angry and demand genocide because I had a rough childhood!"

Let me grab my violin. :shake:

Your posts say the same thing when you whine about things are so rough in Iran and how peaceful the people are there. Are you full of shit too then?

Just because someone disagrees with you does not make them dishonest.

i don't know his story, so I don't know if FC58 is lying or not. But I hate the fact that because he disagrees with you, somehow his lifestory is somehow a lie, based on the way he posts...that is the biggest load of crap I have heard in a long while.

KILLER_CLOWN

07-25-2011, 01:19 AM

One nutjob does not make a movement or radically change the current landscape.

Oh I agree with that, now if we could apply the same logic in all cases objectively.

Frankie

07-25-2011, 01:26 AM

Frankie and Jenson both really crossed a line with this shit.

Yeah we are the ones who have been using profanity on you and threatened physical harm. :rolleyes:

You are a sick psycho totally detached from reality. Get help before your family or coworkers become statistics.

Frankie

07-25-2011, 01:28 AM

Your posts say the same thing when you whine about things are so rough in Iran and how peaceful the people are there. Are you full of shit too then?

Just because someone disagrees with you does not make them dishonest.

i don't know his story, so I don't know if FC58 is lying or not. But I hate the fact that because he disagrees with you, somehow his lifestory is somehow a lie, based on the way he posts...that is the biggest load of crap I have heard in a long while.

Read the entire progression of posts. Till then judge not.

mnchiefsguy

07-25-2011, 01:30 AM

Yeah we are the ones who have been using profanity on you and threatened physical harm. :rolleyes:

You are a sick psycho totally detached from reality. Get help before your family or coworkers become statistics.

Now Frankie..you had to know that calling him a liar about what I am sure is an important part of his life was going to get a reaction. You post with no facts, then try to take the high road when people get pissed at you. Next up, you will probably say something about his momma. I would not put it past you. You can't disagree with anyone on this board without resorting to a personal attack...whether it is Donger, or patteau, or FC58, HCF, etc. You really need to control all of that hate inside you, it must be eating you up inside.

mnchiefsguy

07-25-2011, 01:31 AM

Read the entire progression of posts. Till then judge not.

Offer some proof then. Catch him changing his story or saying something that doesn't fit, etc...just saying he is liar because of how you interpreted his posts is stupid...anyone with half a brain could figure that out.

Jenson71

07-25-2011, 01:33 AM

Now Frankie..you had to know that calling him a liar about what I am sure is an important part of his life was going to get a reaction. You post with no facts, then try to take the high road when people get pissed at you. Next up, you will probably say something about his momma. I would not put it past you. You can't disagree with anyone on this board without resorting to a personal attack...whether it is Donger, or patteau, or FC58, HCF, etc. You really need to control all of that hate inside you, it must be eating you up inside.

I bet Frankie physically threatens other members of this board. I bet he sends them messages telling them that he's a resourceful guy and would hunt them down. I bet he does all that, he's so hateful. And I bet you'd defend him then, wouldn't you, jackass?

Frankie

07-25-2011, 01:37 AM

Next up, you will probably say something about his momma. I would not put it past you. You can't disagree with anyone on this board without resorting to a personal attack...whether it is Donger, or patteau, or FC58, HCF, etc. You really need to control all of that hate inside you, it must be eating you up inside.

LMAO

You don't read too well do you?
LMAO

mnchiefsguy

07-25-2011, 01:41 AM

I bet Frankie physically threatens other members of this board. I bet he sends them messages telling them that he's a resourceful guy and would hunt them down. I bet he does all that, he's so hateful. And I bet you'd defend him then, wouldn't you, jackass?

Look asshole...if you could fucking read, you would notice that I did not address whether FC58 was right or wrong in what he said. All I said was you were being a prick for picking on his kids. I must have hit a nerve with you, since you continually post to have the last word.

Nobody should be threatening anyone. FC58 lost his temper and overreacted, in my opinion. But you were immature and a prick trying to get a reaction out of him..so don't be surprised when the reaction surpasses what you expect.

mnchiefsguy

07-25-2011, 01:42 AM

LMAO

You don't read too well do you?
LMAO

You deny making personal attacks? I bet the posters I listed would disagree with you.

Jenson71

07-25-2011, 01:43 AM

Look asshole...if you could ****ing read, you would notice that I did not address whether FC58 was right or wrong in what he said. All I said was you were being a prick for picking on his kids. I must have hit a nerve with you, since you continually post to have the last word.

Nobody should be threatening anyone. FC58 lost his temper and overreacted, in my opinion. But you were immature and a prick trying to get a reaction out of him..so don't be surprised when the reaction surpasses what you expect.

You think I should expect to be hunted down and beaten now?

You know who has a problem with reading is you -- you continually claim that I picked on his kid. Fuck you, liar.

Frankie

07-25-2011, 01:46 AM

You deny making personal attacks? I bet the posters I listed would disagree with you.

Yep they have all been such angels for years.

mnchiefsguy

07-25-2011, 01:47 AM

You think I should expect to be hunted down and beaten now?

You know who has a problem with reading is you -- you continually claim that I picked on his kid. **** you, liar.

Where did I say that? All I said was that you were being a prick.

I never said you should be hunted down and beaten, and if you are saying that, you are the fucking liar, and I call you out on it right now.

I never said you should be hunted down and beaten, and if you are saying that, you are the ****ing liar, and I call you out on it right now.

What the fuck do you mean "All I said was that you were being a pricked."!!??! LMAO This can't get any better, can it?

No, dumbass, you said a lot more than that. You said I was making fun of his kid. You said I insulted his kid. You said that numerous times. You said FC58's reaction of physically threatening me was an understandable reaction for a father, and you implied that one day, I too would physically threaten people who did the 'grave sin' that I committed.

mnchiefsguy

07-25-2011, 02:01 AM

What the **** do you mean "All I said was that you were being a pricked."!!??! LMAO This can't get any better, can it?

No, dumbass, you said a lot more than that. You said I was making fun of his kid. You said I insulted his kid. You said that numerous times. You said FC58's reaction of physically threatening me was an understandable reaction for a father, and you implied that one day, I too would physically threaten people who did the 'grave sin' that I committed.

No, what I said was that one day if you have kids of your own, you would be sensitive to when folks insulted them. I am sorry if you interpreted that as an endorsement of violence, that certainly was not the case. I also stated I thought FC58 overreacted and was not serious. I am sorry if you also viewed that as an endorsement of his position, which it clearly was not.

Jenson71

07-25-2011, 02:02 AM

No, what I said was that one day if you have kids of your own, you would be sensitive to when folks insulted them. I am sorry if you interpreted that as an endorsement of violence, that certainly was not the case. I also stated I thought FC58 overreacted and was not serious. I am sorry if you also viewed that as an endorsement of his position, which it clearly was not.

This half-truthed shit, which was the most honest thing you've said yet, should be your last word on this subject.

mnchiefsguy

07-25-2011, 01:35 PM

This half-truthed shit, which was the most honest thing you've said yet, should be your last word on this subject.

You will either die a virgin, or become someone's prison bitch BEP with your personality posts.

See lookie there, I can do that right back at ya too. ;)

BucEyedPea

07-25-2011, 03:41 PM

You will either die a virgin, or become someone's prison bitch BEP with your personality posts.

See lookie there, I can do that right back at ya too. ;)

My point is your anger is highly palpable....comes across as if your blood vessels are going to burst due to the high blood pressure when you discuss Iran or Muslims.

Die a virgin though? I have a grown teen child.

Frankie

07-25-2011, 04:21 PM

i thought it was only frankie that generated this much drama...

I generate this much drama because our resident bigots cannot stand an intelligent outspoken "ferner" stating facts that go against their ignorant view of the world outside of their towns.

Frankie

07-25-2011, 04:22 PM

You're gonna die young FC58 with your Type A personality posts.

If he doesn't murder his family or co-workers first.

ForeverChiefs58

07-25-2011, 05:04 PM

If he doesn't murder his family or co-workers first.

Don't worry about MY family, it is YOUR family you need to worry about though traitor coward bitch.

KC native

07-25-2011, 05:09 PM

Don't worry about MY family, it is YOUR family you need to worry about though traitor coward bitch.

This shit combined with his other posts cross the threat line if you ask me. It's clear that dancemagic58 is trying to dance around the direct part of it.

go bowe

07-25-2011, 05:10 PM

Don't worry about MY family, it is YOUR family you need to worry about though traitor coward bitch.

ok, you got upset in the first place because jenson or frankie said something about you living off your kid...

you took umbrage, understandably so, taking the comment to mean an insult to your child...

now you are making what appear to be thinly-veiled threats against another poster's family...

please take a deep breath and think whether you really want to lower yourself sink to their level...

Jenson71

07-25-2011, 05:27 PM

Don't worry about MY family, it is YOUR family you need to worry about though traitor coward bitch.

Are you seriously talking about Frankie's family in this kind of tone?

go bowe

07-25-2011, 05:30 PM

oh good heavens...

the shit is about to get real...

protect yourself at all times...

vailpass

07-25-2011, 05:31 PM

Are you seriously talking about Frankie's family in this kind of tone?

LMAO Call him a ****** Jenson!

Jenson71

07-25-2011, 05:32 PM

LMAO Call him a ****** Jenson!

A what?

vailpass

07-25-2011, 05:40 PM

A what?

That term you used when you bypassed the filter and got banned. Since then you've moved from pencil neck to half-crazy little fucker. Congrats.

mnchiefsguy

07-25-2011, 05:41 PM

FC58, you gotta back off dude. I know Frankie is pushing your buttons, but you can't start talking about his family. That just reduces your arguments down to his level. It is wrong for anyone to be taking bad about someone's family, regardless of their political beliefs.

Jenson71

07-25-2011, 05:46 PM

That term you used when you bypassed the filter and got banned. Since then you've moved from pencil neck to half-crazy little ****er. Congrats.

Why would I call him that?

Jenson71

07-25-2011, 05:48 PM

FC58, you gotta back off dude. I know Frankie is pushing your buttons, but you can't start talking about his family. That just reduces your arguments down to his level. It is wrong for anyone to be taking bad about someone's family, regardless of their political beliefs.

Two-faced fuck.

vailpass

07-25-2011, 05:54 PM

Why would I call him that?

Why would you run all over the Planet one day calling everyone that? Who knows? It's just fun to see you go batshit.

Jenson71

07-25-2011, 05:58 PM

Why would you run all over the Planet one day calling everyone that? Who knows? It's just fun to see you go batshit.

You don't remember I did that? I thought it was clear, but it must have gone over your head.

mnchiefsguy

07-25-2011, 06:01 PM

Two-faced fuck.

Whatever jerkoff. Stay classy.

Frankie

07-25-2011, 06:04 PM

Don't worry about MY family, it is YOUR family you need to worry about though traitor coward bitch.

So you are gonna murder my family before yours? :shake:

You know what, I think you are just the type. Glad you don't know where I am.

Jenson71

07-25-2011, 06:06 PM

Whatever jerkoff. Stay classy.

I love how last night you were acting like Richard the Lionhearted, but tonight, when someone actually does give a borderline threat to a member's family, you do the equivalent of wrapping your arm around his shoulders and giving him a little pep talk.

What's the difference? In the latter, you have political agreements with him.

You're unprincipled. It's pathetic.

mnchiefsguy

07-25-2011, 06:15 PM

I love how last night you were acting like Richard the Lionhearted, but tonight, when someone actually does give a borderline threat to a member's family, you do the equivalent of wrapping your arm around his shoulders and giving him a little pep talk.

What's the difference? In the latter, you have political agreements with him.

You're unprincipled. It's pathetic.

FC58 is wrong to talk about Frankies, or anyone else's family, period. I stated as such last night. You were the pitbull, and would not let the issue die down. You were pissed off that I called you a prick, and you kept the argument going. I kept up my end of the bargain by not letting you have the last word. Perhaps I should not have, but it was late, and you were being a dick.

I am principled. I called you a dick because you were being one, and you were provoking FC58 on purpose. I did just post I thought FC58 was wrong for saying something about Frankie's family. I did not call him a dick...I did not think he was being one intentionally, I think his temper just got the better of him, and he should probably walk away and cool off. Like your temper got the better of you last night, when you could have just walked away, but you had to keep arguing.

Jenson71

07-25-2011, 06:18 PM

FC58 is wrong to talk about Frankies, or anyone else's family, period. I stated as such last night. You were the pitbull, and would not let the issue die down. You were pissed off that I called you a prick, and you kept the argument going. I kept up my end of the bargain by not letting you have the last word. Perhaps I should not have, but it was late, and you were being a dick.

I am principled. I called you a dick because you were being one, and you were provoking FC58 on purpose. I did just post I thought FC58 was wrong for saying something about Frankie's family. I did not call him a dick...I did not think he was being one intentionally, I think his temper just got the better of him, and he should probably walk away and cool off. Like your temper got the better of you last night, when you could have just walked away, but you had to keep arguing.

You calling me a prick doesn't piss me off at all. You calling me any name you can come up with doesn't piss me off at all.

You piss me off because you're a lying sack of shit who was instigating FC58's hormone-driven, drug-induced meltdown. You're unprincipled, you're pathetic, and you needed to be told to shut up.

mnchiefsguy

07-25-2011, 06:24 PM

You calling me a prick doesn't piss me off at all. You calling me any name you can come up with doesn't piss me off at all.

You piss me off because you're a lying sack of shit who was instigating FC58's hormone-driven, drug-induced meltdown. You're unprincipled, you're pathetic, and you needed to be told to shut up.

You are sadly mistaken. I instigated nothing. You Sir, were the instigator. After FC58's first reaction to your comments, you came back and poked him with the stick again. I just thought what you did was a dick move and called you out on it. You appear not like it when anyone talks back to you, so you turned your guns on me. Would have let the issue die, but I am stubborn sometimes and did not feel like letting you have the last word. I lied about nothing. You know I did not lie, but keep repeating that, and maybe you will begin to believe it.

Hell, let's ask FC58....did anything I say provoke you or instigate you in your argument with Jenson? If I did provoke you, that was not my intent, and I will apologize to Jenson for the hardship he has had to endure.

Jenson71

07-25-2011, 06:26 PM

You are sadly mistaken. I instigated nothing. You Sir, were the instigator. After FC58's first reaction to your comments, you came back and poked him with the stick again. I just thought what you did was a dick move and called you out on it. You appear not like it when anyone talks back to you, so you turned your guns on me. Would have let the issue die, but I am stubborn sometimes and did not feel like letting you have the last word. I lied about nothing. You know I did not lie, but keep repeating that, and maybe you will begin to believe it.

Hell, let's ask FC58....did anything I say provoke you or instigate you in your argument with Jenson? If I did provoke you, that was not my intent, and I will apologize to Jenson for the hardship he has had to endure.

You repeatedly called me out for having insulted his kid in the middle of his outrage. I told you I did no such thing. You continued with the baseless accusations. Don't try to explain yourself. Just shut up and leave.

mnchiefsguy

07-25-2011, 06:33 PM

You repeatedly called me out for having insulted his kid in the middle of his outrage. I told you I did no such thing. You continued with the baseless accusations. Don't try to explain yourself. Just shut up and leave.

I repeatedly told you you were being a dick. FC58 felt you were taking a pot shot at his kid. I thought you were too, and called you a dick for bringing someone's kid into an argument. Nothing more, nothing less. You took exception to that, and we had a nice internet fight. I repeatedly called you out because you kept arguing and calling me names, so I argued and called you names back. That is how an argument works on CP, and particularly in DC.

And I won't fucking leave. This is not your message board, so you can kiss my ass. I will post whatever I think, within the forum rules. You have no power over me, so save your breath for someone who cares what you think.

KILLER_CLOWN

07-25-2011, 06:35 PM

This thread is definitely short on Your mom jokes and my dad can beat up your dad is also absent.

Jenson71

07-25-2011, 06:35 PM

I repeatedly told you you were being a dick. FC58 felt you were taking a pot shot at his kid. I thought you were too, and called you a dick for bringing someone's kid into an argument. Nothing more, nothing less. You took exception to that, and we had a nice internet fight. I repeatedly called you out because you kept arguing and calling me names, so I argued and called you names back. That is how an argument works on CP, and particularly in DC.

And I won't ****ing leave. This is not your message board, so you can kiss my ass. I will post whatever I think, within the forum rules. You have no power over me, so save your breath for someone who cares what you think.

I gave you a good suggestion, if you're smart, you'll take it.

ForeverChiefs58

07-25-2011, 06:37 PM

Oh, come on people! You have got to be kidding me? I said a million times and couldn't have been more clear. Frankie keeps doing it again with me over and over all day and night so I shot it back at him. He has said on here plenty of times he is from Iran. We were talking in the other thread about bombing iran.

I didn't say me personally would hurt anyone's family which is why I am the one who said let's just not go there. It doesn't feel good to even try and sling it back, but I don't know how else to make him stop.

Even though this place can be better than cable, I am going to go take a break for a while and look for something on tv.

-Peace to all

mnchiefsguy

07-25-2011, 06:38 PM

I gave you a good suggestion, if you're smart, you'll take it.

Or what? What are you going to do? Stalk me on a message board. You sure are talking tough.If you don't like me, just ignore me. I could really care less, but my existence on this board seemly causes you pain. Sorry about that.

go bowe

07-25-2011, 06:40 PM

Or what? What are you going to do? Stalk me on a message board. You sure are talking tough.If you don't like me, just ignore me. I could really care less, but my existence on this board seemly causes you pain. Sorry about that.

only on this message board? :p :p :p

Jenson71

07-25-2011, 06:41 PM

Oh, come on people! You have got to be kidding me? I said a million times and couldn't have been more clear. Frankie keeps doing it again with me over and over all day and night so I shot it back at him. He has said on here plenty of times he is from Iran. We were talking in the other thread about bombing iran.

I didn't say me personally would hurt anyone's family which is why I am the one who said let's just not go there. It doesn't feel good to even try and sling it back, but I don't know how else to make him stop.

Even though this place can be better than cable, I am going to go take a break for a while and look for something on tv.

I doubt he would want to stalk me in real life...my life is pretty dull, he would get bored really quick.

ah, but do you have any attractive kids?

j/k, i don't want to get killed... :) :) :)

mnchiefsguy

07-25-2011, 06:51 PM

I doubt that.

Thanks for sharing. More people think you are an immature punk jackass than think I am a lying unprincipled one. I probably should not have said that, I am sure you will allow your anger to control you and you can yell at me in this thread some more, or send me another nasty pm.

Here is some advice for you...why don't you just walk away from the argument...I can tell you are used to having the last word..but I am the same way, so if you really want me to shut up, then quit directing posts at me. Odds are, things will quiet down between. Keep posting, and I will probably respond back, as I also am the type who likes to get the last word in. If this bothers you...oh well.

go bowe

07-25-2011, 06:53 PM

Thanks for sharing. More people think you are an immature punk jackass than think I am a lying unprincipled one. I probably should not have said that, I am sure you will allow your anger to control you and you can yell at me in this thread some more, or send me another nasty pm.

Here is some advice for you...why don't you just walk away from the argument...I can tell you are used to having the last word..but I am the same way, so if you really want me to shut up, then quit directing posts at me. Odds are, things will quiet down between. Keep posting, and I will probably respond back, as I also am the type who likes to get the last word in. If this bothers you...oh well.
oh good...

two last worders in the same thread... :huh: :huh: :huh:

mnchiefsguy

07-25-2011, 06:55 PM

ah, but do you have any attractive kids?

j/k, i don't want to get killed... :) :) :)

I don't think I could kill anybody. Get mad enough too...maybe, but when push came to shove, it takes a lot to kill another person (well, at least I think it does, having never done it, I can't definitively say), and I don't think I could, unless it was a situation where I need to save myself, my family, or another person. Hopefully I will never know and never be in that kind of situation.

mnchiefsguy

07-25-2011, 06:56 PM

oh good...

two last worders in the same thread... :huh: :huh: :huh:

Sorry about that gobowe....I am not as bad about as I used to be, but Jenson got me all fired up, and I just can't let him think he was won by having the last word. I apologize in advance for any pain I may cause you.

go bowe

07-25-2011, 06:58 PM

I don't think I could kill anybody. Get mad enough too...maybe, but when push came to shove, it takes a lot to kill another person (well, at least I think it does, having never done it, I can't definitively say), and I don't think I could, unless it was a situation where I need to save myself, my family, or another person. Hopefully I will never know and never be in that kind of situation.

unfortunately, people do crazy shit and kill other people in fits of rage without thinking twice about it...

and i hope you're never in that situation too...

go bowe

07-25-2011, 06:59 PM

Sorry about that gobowe....I am not as bad about as I used to be, but Jenson got me all fired up, and I just can't let him think he was won by having the last word. I apologize in advance for any pain I may cause you.

no pain, no problem... :thumb:

mnchiefsguy

07-25-2011, 07:03 PM

no pain, no problem... :thumb:

Cool. You make fun of me, but it seems to be in good fun, so I am glad we are cool. :thumb:

Jenson71

07-25-2011, 07:03 PM

Thanks for sharing. More people think you are an immature punk jackass than think I am a lying unprincipled one. I probably should not have said that, I am sure you will allow your anger to control you and you can yell at me in this thread some more, or send me another nasty pm.

Here is some advice for you...why don't you just walk away from the argument...I can tell you are used to having the last word..but I am the same way, so if you really want me to shut up, then quit directing posts at me. Odds are, things will quiet down between. Keep posting, and I will probably respond back, as I also am the type who likes to get the last word in. If this bothers you...oh well.

I'm younger than you by a good deal. You will die before me. You don't want to play the final word game with me.

You spent a long time accusing me of attacking someone's kid yesterday. I asked you to point that out, you couldn't because I didn't, but you continued to attack me. I sent you one, just one, PM asking you to end your attacks. You decided to report that to moderators because you felt it was threatening (as anyone can see, because I put it on the forum, it wasn't threatening). You continued to accuse me of attacking someone's kid, again, without proof.

You were lying. That's exactly what that is. You falsely accused me of doing something I didn't do and you kept doing it. That's why you're a liar.

As far as unprincipled, that is evident for a several reasons. You instigate arguments. You stick your neck where it shouldn't be. And you're a hypocrite, because you show almost no outrage on a clearer example of family threatening when the person who does it is on "your side."

- Frankie keeps doing it again with me over and over all day and night so I shot it back at him.

-I didn't say me personally would hurt anyone's family

-Peace to all
Nice try shameless liar.

Jenson71

07-25-2011, 07:05 PM

Sorry about that gobowe....I am not as bad about as I used to be, but Jenson got me all fired up, and I just can't let him think he was won by having the last word. I apologize in advance for any pain I may cause you.

Believe me, if I think I won, it's not because I had the last word

listopencil

07-25-2011, 07:23 PM

What are the religions of those fighting in this thread? :hmmm:

Darn Christians. Always fighting.

DaFace

07-25-2011, 07:56 PM

You guys are impressive. It never ceases to amaze me how petty many people in this forum are.

Anyway, FC58's getting a short vacation for the threats. As for the rest who have been egging him on - leave family members out of it, or you'll be joining him.

AustinChief

07-25-2011, 08:01 PM

You guys are impressive. It never ceases to amaze me how petty many people in this forum are.

Anyway, FC58's getting a short vacation for the threats. As for the rest who have been egging him on - leave family members out of it, or you'll be joining him.

Shut your face before I stomp it! And your brother's? (do you even have a brother.. if so, he better watch out!)

What amazes me is that some people are still more active in this forum even now that FOOTBALL is back.

DaFace

07-25-2011, 08:16 PM

Shut your face before I stomp it! And your brother's? (do you even have a brother.. if so, he better watch out!)

What amazes me is that some people are still more active in this forum even now that FOOTBALL is back.

I will rape your sister (if you have one) and your dog.

Frazod

07-25-2011, 08:18 PM

I will rape your sister (if you have one) and your dog.

In order to get the full effect, you need to make a thinly-veiled derogatory comment about his race, religion or ancestry. If that fails, call his wife a fat whore. :thumb:

DaFace

07-25-2011, 08:19 PM

In order to get the full effect, you need to make a thinly-veiled derogatory comment about his ancestry. If that fails, call his wife a fat whore. :thumb:

Well, that wouldn't work well. 1) I know he's not married and 2) I don't think anyone who's been around here for very long would think that he would end up settling for a "fat whore." :)

Frazod

07-25-2011, 08:20 PM

Well, that wouldn't work well. 1) I know he's not married and 2) I don't think anyone who's been around here for very long would think that he would end up settling for a "fat whore." :)

That's the beauty of it - she doesn't have to fat or a whore. You just have to be enough of a fucking scumbag to say it. :)

mlyonsd

07-25-2011, 08:22 PM

Oh-oh....now you've ticked off mom and dad.

AustinChief

07-25-2011, 08:25 PM

Well, that wouldn't work well. 1) I know he's not married and 2) I don't think anyone who's been around here for very long would think that he would end up settling for a "fat whore." :)

Valid points, but you are in luck cuz I do have a sister... and though I don't have a dog, you can rape my sister's dogs...

dirk digler

07-25-2011, 08:28 PM

I didn't realize till now how many groupies Frankie has. The guy is a pimp with all the bitches that he attracts.

:)

stevieray

07-25-2011, 08:40 PM

Anyway, FC58's getting a short vacation for the threats. As for the rest who have been egging him on - leave family members out of it, or you'll be joining him.

I think if someone eggs it on, they should be banned also. if one brother eggs another one on, and the other brother strikes out...both get punished...it's only fair.

go bowe

07-25-2011, 08:45 PM

Cool. You make fun of me, but it seems to be in good fun, so I am glad we are cool. :thumb:

i make fun of nearly everybody, it just means i like you... :D :D :D

RedNeckRaider

07-25-2011, 08:48 PM

Shut your face before I stomp it! And your brother's? (do you even have a brother.. if so, he better watch out!)

What amazes me is that some people are still more active in this forum even now that FOOTBALL is back.

There is a football forum here??? Where is it located?

patteeu

07-25-2011, 08:52 PM

What are the religions of those fighting in this thread? :hmmm:

All I know is that Frankie the Muslim is right in the center of this. Big surprise, huh?

Jenson seems to be representing pedophile priests.

I'm guessing that KC naive is representing the Catholic Inquisition.

Meanwhile, I'm not sure who FC58 represents. Maybe the harsh God of the Old Testament.

go bowe

07-25-2011, 08:57 PM

i think the rule on threats is more like i described than the version you put forth, pat...

at least it looks that way to me, now that fc58 has been banned...

i hope he comes back soon...

listopencil

07-25-2011, 09:00 PM

All I know is that Frankie the Muslim is right in the center of this. Big surprise, huh?

Jenson seems to be representing audiophile priests.

I'm guessing that KC naive is representing the Catholic Inquisition.

Meanwhile, I'm not sure who FC58 represents. Maybe the harsh God of the Old Testament.

.

I am not religious at all. But i would defend against blind ignorant hatred every time. I'm chiming in for the principle of it. If this thread was the same belittling, angry, agitation-causing thread about Christians or Jews you'd see me fight it the same way.

patteeu

07-25-2011, 09:01 PM

i think the rule on threats is more like i described than the version you put forth, pat...

at least it looks that way to me, now that fc58 has been banned...

i hope he comes back soon...

I still don't think so, but if he actually threatened to track Jenson down and do something to him, my argument isn't applicable. I didn't see him do anything to Frankie or KC Naive worthy of a ban.

patteeu

07-25-2011, 09:02 PM

.

You've heard of secular Jews, no? I realize that Frankie isn't religious, but he was raised with the religion of jihad. I'd be surprised if KC Naive is a believing Catholic too.

listopencil

07-25-2011, 09:08 PM

You've heard of secular Jews, no? I realize that Frankie isn't religious, but he was raised with the religion of jihad. I'd be surprised if KC Naive is a believing Catholic too.

I've heard of "Jew" used as a social group rather than a religious belief. I've never heard of Islam referred to as "the religion of jihad" in any context other than to ignorantly belittle someone who has different beliefs than yourself. I have heard of ex-Catholics. In my experience they move on to other faiths. Typically Protestant ones.

patteeu

07-25-2011, 09:13 PM

I've heard of "Jew" used as a social group rather than a religious belief. I've never heard of Islam referred to as "the religion of jihad" in any context other than to ignorantly belittle someone who has different beliefs than yourself. I have heard of ex-Catholics. In my experience they move on to other faiths. Typically Protestant ones.

Are there other religions that believe in jihad? I'm pretty sure that "jihad" is an Islamic term. Q.E.D.

There are plenty of ex-Catholics who move on to agnosticism and atheism. I'd guess that KC Naive is in this group just like I am, but I've never heard him say one way or the other.

listopencil

07-25-2011, 09:19 PM

Are there other religions that believe in jihad? I'm pretty sure that "jihad" is an Islamic term. Q.E.D.

There are plenty of ex-Catholics who move on to agnosticism and atheism. I'd guess that KC Naive is in this group just like I am, but I've never heard him say one way or the other.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't "jihad" mean "holy war"?

go bowe

07-25-2011, 09:22 PM

I still don't think so, but if he actually threatened to track Jenson down and do something to him, my argument isn't applicable. I didn't see him do anything to Frankie or KC Naive worthy of a ban.

o c'mon...

according to you jack the ripper would not be ban-worthy... :Poke:

Jaric

07-25-2011, 09:22 PM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't "jihad" mean "holy war"?

From wikipedia (your mileage may vary.)

Muslims use the word in a religious context to refer to three types of struggles: an internal struggle to maintain faith, the struggle to improve the Muslim society, or the struggle to defend Islam.I believe the literal translation is "struggle."

listopencil

07-25-2011, 09:24 PM

I'll correct myself, actually. Here's a Wiki entry (yeah, I know. Wikipedia. Boo. Hiss) that contradicts what I said. I have found other sites that corroborate this definition:

Jihad (<small>English</small> <small>pronunciation:</small> / (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IPA_for_English)dʒ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IPA_for_English#Key)ɪ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IPA_for_English#Key)ˈ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IPA_for_English#Key)h (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IPA_for_English#Key)ɑː (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IPA_for_English#Key)d (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IPA_for_English#Key)/ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IPA_for_English);<sup id="cite_ref-0" class="reference">[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad#cite_note-0)</sup> Arabic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_language): جهاد‎ ǧihād [dʒiˈhæːd] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IPA_for_Arabic)), an Islamic term (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Islamic_terms_in_Arabic), is a religious duty of Muslims (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim). In Arabic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_language), the word jihād translates as a noun meaning "struggle". Jihad appears 41 times in the Quran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quran) and frequently in the idiomatic expression "striving in the way of God (al-jihad fi sabil Allah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allah))".<sup id="cite_ref-1" class="reference">[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad#cite_note-1)</sup><sup id="cite_ref-Merriam_2-0" class="reference">[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad#cite_note-Merriam-2)</sup><sup id="cite_ref-MIC_3-0" class="reference">[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad#cite_note-MIC-3)</sup> A person engaged in jihad is called a mujahid (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahid); the plural is mujahideen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahideen). Jihad is an important religious duty for Muslims. A minority among the Sunni scholars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunni_Islam) sometimes refer to this duty as the sixth pillar of Islam (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Pillars_of_Islam), though it occupies no such official status.<sup id="cite_ref-jih_4-0" class="reference">[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad#cite_note-jih-4)</sup> In Twelver (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelver) Shi'a Islam (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shi%27a_Islam), however, Jihad is one of the 10 Practices of the Religion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Practices_of_the_Religion).
Jihad in Islam, a term meaning "struggle"; used without any qualifiers it is generally understood in the West to refer to a "holy war" on behalf of Islam.

Muslims use the word in a religious context to refer to three types of struggles: an internal struggle to maintain faith, the struggle to improve the Muslim society, or the struggle to defend Islam.<sup id="cite_ref-bbcislam_5-0" class="reference">[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad#cite_note-bbcislam-5)</sup> The prominent British (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom)-American orientalist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oriental_studies) Bernard Lewis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Lewis) argues that in the hadiths and the classical manuals of Islamic law jihad has a military meaning in the large majority of cases.<sup id="cite_ref-6" class="reference">[7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad#cite_note-6)</sup> In a commentary of the hadith Sahih Muslim (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahih_Muslim), entitled al-Minhaj, the medieval Islamic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age) scholar Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahya_ibn_Sharaf_al-Nawawi) stated that "one of the collective duties of the community as a whole (fard kifaya) is to lodge a valid protest, to solve problems of religion, to have knowledge of Divine Law, to command what is right and forbid wrong conduct".<sup id="cite_ref-7" class="reference">[8] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad#cite_note-7)</sup>
<sup id="cite_ref-7" class="reference">
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad#cite_note-7)</sup>
In western societies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_world) the term jihad is often translated as "holy war".<sup id="cite_ref-8" class="reference">[9] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad#cite_note-8)</sup><sup id="cite_ref-9" class="reference">[10] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad#cite_note-9)</sup> Scholars of Islamic studies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_studies) often stress that these words are not synonymous.<sup id="cite_ref-10" class="reference">[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad#cite_note-10)</sup> Muslim authors, in particular, tend to reject such an approach, stressing non-militant connotations of the word.<sup id="cite_ref-11" class="reference">[12] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad#cite_note-11)</sup><sup id="cite_ref-12" class="reference">[13] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad#cite_note-12)</sup>

So it seems that "jihad" has some connotations that closely parallel behavior I've seen in other religions. The struggle to maintain your beliefs, the struggle to bring about beneficial change in society that reflects your lessons, and the struggle to defend yourself against those that would destroy the people of your faith.

patteeu

07-25-2011, 09:36 PM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't "jihad" mean "holy war"?

That's my understanding.

patteeu

07-25-2011, 09:36 PM

So it seems that "jihad" has some connotations that closely parallel behavior I've seen in other religions. The struggle to maintain your beliefs, the struggle to bring about beneficial change in society that reflects your lessons, and the struggle to defend yourself against those that would destroy the people of your faith.

OK, so what?

listopencil

07-25-2011, 09:40 PM

OK, so what?

So are you trying to say that there aren't other religions that believe in those ideals?

BucEyedPea

07-25-2011, 09:52 PM

Jihad does not mean Holy War it means "struggle."

Frankie

07-25-2011, 10:01 PM

Are there other religions that believe in jihad? I'm pretty sure that "jihad" is an Islamic term. Q.E.D.

And the word "Crusade" is the Christian counterpart.

Frankie

07-25-2011, 10:05 PM

Jihad does not mean Holy War it means "struggle."

And the word "Crusade" is the Christian counterpart.

It does. Those definitions posted here are correct. Except it has now been bastardized by fundamentalist nuts to also mean Holy War.

patteeu

07-25-2011, 10:06 PM

So are you trying to say that there aren't other religions that believe in those ideals?

This is what I said:

I realize that Frankie isn't religious, but he was raised with the religion of jihad.

To spell it out for you, "the religion of jihad" = islam. I'm not talking about other religions. If I had said "the religion of transubstantiation", I'd be talking about Catholicism.

To spell it out for you, "the religion of jihad" = islam. I'm not talking about other religions. If I had said "the religion of transubstantiation", I'd be talking about Catholicism.

So you are complimenting Frankie? That's very nice of you.

BucEyedPea

07-25-2011, 10:24 PM

the religion of struggle = islam.

listopencil

07-25-2011, 10:32 PM

the religion of struggle = islam.

I think a lot of religious people struggle with the same issues.

BucEyedPea

07-25-2011, 10:52 PM

I think a lot of religious people struggle with the same issues.

I haven't really thought about but I guess it's true more or less for different sects at different times. I don't know if it applies to Warren Jeff's religion though. :p

listopencil

07-25-2011, 11:11 PM

I haven't really thought about but I guess it's true more or less for different sects at different times. I don't know if it applies to Warren Jeff's religion though. :p

I just googled "Warren Jeff". Yuck.

BucEyedPea

07-25-2011, 11:13 PM

I just googled "Warren Jeff". Yuck.

It was on Joy's show tonight. At one time I supported their freedom of religion even though it was weird, but it's changed. I heard tonight, that they even prevent their babies from crying by waterboarding them until they never cry anymore and grow up submissive I was disgusted. That is just abusive.

Jenson71

07-25-2011, 11:26 PM

I think if someone eggs it on, they should be banned also. if one brother eggs another one on, and the other brother strikes out...both get punished...it's only fair.

That's a great standard, Chief Justice. I can create faux outrage, threaten to kill you, and get you banned for supposedly egging me on.

You know what, you're egging me on right now. You need to be banned. You know, out of fairness.

Or we could keep the rules they are, and just say that people are responsible for their own words in this forum. Or does that make too much sense for you? No, no, I know what you're real goal is: it's not sense, it's not fairness. It's punishing people you don't like.

mnchiefsguy

07-25-2011, 11:59 PM

I'm younger than you by a good deal. You will die before me. You don't want to play the final word game with me.

You spent a long time accusing me of attacking someone's kid yesterday. I asked you to point that out, you couldn't because I didn't, but you continued to attack me. I sent you one, just one, PM asking you to end your attacks. You decided to report that to moderators because you felt it was threatening (as anyone can see, because I put it on the forum, it wasn't threatening). You continued to accuse me of attacking someone's kid, again, without proof.

You were lying. That's exactly what that is. You falsely accused me of doing something I didn't do and you kept doing it. That's why you're a liar.

As far as unprincipled, that is evident for a several reasons. You instigate arguments. You stick your neck where it shouldn't be. And you're a hypocrite, because you show almost no outrage on a clearer example of family threatening when the person who does it is on "your side."

Dude, you take yourself wayyyy too seriously. In my opinion, you were picking on his kid. I thought you were being a dick and told you so. The only reason I repeated that was that you kept fucking arguing with me. Then you sent me a nasty pm (which did not ask me to stop, but tried to intimidate into being silent, which backfired on your dumbass), and that just pissed me off....so I kept poking you with the stick, since every time I called you a dick, you would going flying off the handle with some diatribe post. If you hadn't kept arguing, the conversation would have died out.

Point to an argument I have instigated. I tuned into this AFTER FC58 went off on you, so you cannot say that I instigated anything. He was already pissed at you, and after the first time he went off on you, you mentioned his kid again. Don't sit there and try to deny you weren't egging him on.

I will stick my neck wherever I damn well please. I have violated no forum rules in my posts, and if you don't like them tough shit.

I am sorry I did not chastise FC58 hard enough for your likening. I agreed with everyone else that he had lost his temper, and that what he said was inappropriate. The only difference between my comments about him and about you was that I called you a prick.

So you can take your elitist post and shove them up your ass. I will not be intimidated or dominated by you in this conversation.

Have a nice day.

go bowe

07-26-2011, 12:08 AM

Dude, you take yourself wayyyy too seriously. In my opinion, you were picking on his kid. I thought you were being a dick and told you so. The only reason I repeated that was that you kept fucking arguing with me. Then you sent me a nasty pm (which did not ask me to stop, but tried to intimidate into being silent, which backfired on your dumbass), and that just pissed me off....so I kept poking you with the stick, since every time I called you a dick, you would going flying off the handle with some diatribe post. If you hadn't kept arguing, the conversation would have died out.

Point to an argument I have instigated. I tuned into this AFTER FC58 went off on you, so you cannot say that I instigated anything. He was already pissed at you, and after the first time he went off on you, you mentioned his kid again. Don't sit there and try to deny you weren't egging him on.

I will stick my neck wherever I damn well please. I have violated no forum rules in my posts, and if you don't like them tough shit.

I am sorry I did not chastise FC58 hard enough for your likening. I agreed with everyone else that he had lost his temper, and that what he said was inappropriate. The only difference between my comments about him and about you was that I called you a prick.

So you can take your elitist post and shove them up ass. I will not be intimidated or dominated by you in this conversation.

Have a nice day.

shove them up ass?

nttawwt... :) :) :)

mnchiefsguy

07-26-2011, 12:10 AM

shove them up ass?

nttawwt... :) :) :)

Oops. I have corrected it. Thanks!

Jenson71

07-26-2011, 12:25 AM

Dude, you take yourself wayyyy too seriously. In my opinion, you were picking on his kid. I thought you were being a dick and told you so. The only reason I repeated that was that you kept ****ing arguing with me. Then you sent me a nasty pm (which did not ask me to stop, but tried to intimidate into being silent, which backfired on your dumbass), and that just pissed me off....so I kept poking you with the stick, since every time I called you a dick, you would going flying off the handle with some diatribe post. If you hadn't kept arguing, the conversation would have died out.

Point to an argument I have instigated. I tuned into this AFTER FC58 went off on you, so you cannot say that I instigated anything. He was already pissed at you, and after the first time he went off on you, you mentioned his kid again. Don't sit there and try to deny you weren't egging him on.

I will stick my neck wherever I damn well please. I have violated no forum rules in my posts, and if you don't like them tough shit.

I am sorry I did not chastise FC58 hard enough for your likening. I agreed with everyone else that he had lost his temper, and that what he said was inappropriate. The only difference between my comments about him and about you was that I called you a prick.

So you can take your elitist post and shove them up your ass. I will not be intimidated or dominated by you in this conversation.

Have a nice day.

I know it's your opinion that I was picking on his kid. It's a great opinion. It's one of those opinions that don't have any basis in reality, but you think it's valid because you put "in my opinion" near it. Like, "In my opinion, you have pedophilia tendencies" or "In my opinion, you were making fun of Frankie's children" or "I think you have a homosexual desire for FC58, in my opinion."

Everyone knows you didn't start it. Congratulations. My point is that you were there stirring the pot, inciting him to continue on his fake crusade (as you call it, you were poking me with a stick). You needed to be told to shut up, so I did so in a tone that accurately conveyed my displeasure with your actions. You certainly are free to stick your neck where you want, but do expect that it will sometimes get kicked. And that doesn't mean people don't have a point when they tell you to stop. I was simply exercising that.

I am glad you realize the error of your ways by not being as harsh to an actual person threatening violence than you were to a person who did not attack a person's kid. Please remember to act more justly in the future instead of letting your political persuasion selectively dictate your outrage.

And a good day to you! Or, in the words of FC58, peace to you!

BTW, I'm sure you're the only person who thinks you calling someone a dick has any effect on their mood. Could you join the rest of us in realizing that nobody cares what names you call someone? It reminds me of an overbearing housewife from the 1890s in a bridge club.

You are free to have the last word on this subject between us. I'm starting to repeat myself more than I care to, and I'm realizing that you're too stupid and immature for my reasoning to make any difference. I trust that any reasonable person will look at this thread and come to the conclusion that I have: you're a gaping bloody c*** with no principles and liar's disposition.

mnchiefsguy

07-26-2011, 12:38 AM

I know it's your opinion that I was picking on his kid. It's a great opinion. It's one of those opinions that don't have any basis in reality, but you think it's valid because you put "in my opinion" near it. Like, "In my opinion, you have pedophilia tendencies" or "In my opinion, you were making fun of Frankie's children" or "I think you have a homosexual desire for FC58, in my opinion."

Everyone knows you didn't start it. Congratulations. My point is that you were there stirring the pot, inciting him to continue on his fake crusade (as you call it, you were poking me with a stick). You needed to be told to shut up, so I did so in a tone that accurately conveyed my displeasure with your actions. You certainly are free to stick your neck where you want, but do expect that it will sometimes get kicked. And that doesn't mean people don't have a point when they tell you to stop. I was simply exercising that.

I am glad you realize the error of your ways by not being as harsh to an actual person threatening violence than you were to a person who did not attack a person's kid. Please remember to act more justly in the future instead of letting your political persuasion selectively dictate your outrage.

And a good day to you! Or, in the words of FC58, peace to you!

BTW, I'm sure you're the only person who thinks you calling someone a dick has any effect on their mood. Could you join the rest of us in realizing that nobody cares what names you call someone? It reminds me of an overbearing housewife from the 1890s in a bridge club.

If's it is my opinion, it can't be a lie, can it?

Let me get this straight...calling you a dick somehow incites FC58...I think it was your posts that did that, and you know it. Nice try at deflection. If I had said nothing at all, your second post about his kid would have still gotten the same reaction. Hell, in one post during all of the exchanges, over two threads, I even said to FC58 directly that he should walk away.

So using your standards, your assertion that I am an instigator is a LIE. Even I was "stirring the pot", that is not instigating, by the very definition of the word. So your opinion has no basis in reality. The event would have happened whether I commented or not.

You are now a liar. Congratulations!

Heed your own advice, which I bolded. You should expected to kicked too. You are not immune. Sorry if you don't like it.

Jenson71

07-26-2011, 12:47 AM

If's it is my opinion, it can't be a lie, can it?

That's my point. You lie but attempt to cover it by saying "It's my opinion." It's like saying "Just my opinion, but I think that guy is a racist" when you know that he never said anything that would be considered racist by reasonable people.

Let me get this straight...calling you a dick somehow incites FC58...I think it was your posts that did that, and you know it. Nice try at deflection. If I had said nothing at all, your second post about his kid would have still gotten the same reaction. Hell, in one post during all of the exchanges, over two threads, I even said to FC58 directly that he should walk away.

So using your standards, your assertion that I am an instigator is a LIE. Even I was "stirring the pot", that is not instigating, by the very definition of the word. So your opinion has no basis in reality. The event would have happened whether I commented or not.

You are now a liar. Congratulations!

I don't think you could possibly get much straight, in part because you are constantly hooked up on what you must perceive as the heroic action of you calling me a dick. Again, that doesn't bother me. What bothers me is you saying that I attacked his kid when I did no such thing. Because his oversensitive soul was inflamed by what he wrongly considered to be me insulting his kid, you accusing me of insulting his kid further inflamed his emotional outburst. It's not that you started it, it's that you incited its furtherance. Stirring the pot is, by definition, an inciting, which is, by one definition, instigation.

That probably doesn't make sense to you, because you're illiterate (just my opinion!), but I am hoping for the best.

mnchiefsguy

07-26-2011, 01:06 AM

That's my point. You lie but attempt to cover it by saying "It's my opinion." It's like saying "Just my opinion, but I think that guy is a racist" when you know that he never said anything that would be considered racist by reasonable people.

I don't think you could possibly get much straight, in part because you are constantly hooked up on what you must perceive as the heroic action of you calling me a dick. Again, that doesn't bother me. What bothers me is you saying that I attacked his kid when I did no such thing. Because his oversensitive soul was inflamed by what he wrongly considered to be me insulting his kid, you accusing me of insulting his kid further inflamed his emotional outburst. It's not that you started it, it's that you incited its furtherance. Stirring the pot is, by definition, an inciting, which is, by one definition, instigation.

That probably doesn't make sense to you, because you're illiterate (just my opinion!), but I am hoping for the best.

Whatever...so your second post, when you brought up his kid again, did nothing to stir the pot, but my post calling you a dick and saying it was not an honorable thing to pick on his kid was what incited him? Okay, whatever.

Opinions can't be lies. What you seem to think are rock solid facts are in fact subjective. This not a situation where I said "Look, he has a knife", when in fact you don't. That would be a lie. Saying you were picking on his kid is an opinion. You may think you weren't, but you were brought his kid up in a thread about politics. Somehow I don't think you were trying to be nice.

And if you are not bothered by being called a dick by me, why is it every time I do it, you react to it?

We can be done with this anytime you want, but do not expect me to go feebly into the night.

Jenson71

07-26-2011, 01:15 AM

Opinions can't be lies. What you seem to think are rock solid facts are in fact subjective. This not a situation where I said "Look, he has a knife", when in fact you don't. That would be a lie. Saying you were picking on his kid is an opinion. You may think you weren't, but you were brought his kid up in a thread about politics. Somehow I don't think you were trying to be nice.

That I brought up his kid is a fact. That I made fun of his kid is not a fact. It has no basis in reality. You claiming I made fun of or attacked his kid is not an opinion. That either happened or it didn't happen, and in our case, it didn't happen. No one can reasonably construe the fact that I said "You want to live off your son's talents" as making fun of the kid or attacking him. It can be perceived in two ways regarding the kid: 1) I am making a neutral statement about the kid and his talents or 2) I am complimenting the kid's talents.

But in no way can it reasonably be considered an attack on the kid. So claiming so is either the work of a liar or someone who is unreasonable. Because I think you're reasonable, in the most base way, you are thus lying.

I don't expect you to go feebly into the night. I expect you to continue with your stupidity and dumbassery.

|Zach|

07-26-2011, 01:23 AM

We can be done with this anytime you want, but do not expect me to go feebly into the night.

It is true. You are brave to rage....RAGE against the dying of the light while you attempt to create a kid controversy where there is none.

Jenson didn't talk shit on his kid.

mnchiefsguy

07-26-2011, 01:24 AM

That I brought up his kid is a fact. That I made fun of his kid is not a fact. It has no basis in reality. You claiming I made fun of or attacked his kid is not an opinion. That either happened or it didn't happen, and in our case, it didn't happen. No one can reasonably construe the fact that I said "You want to live off your son's talents" as making fun of the kid or attacking him. It can be perceived in two ways regarding the kid: 1) I am making a neutral statement about the kid and his talents or 2) I am complimenting the kid's talents.

But in no way can it reasonably be considered an attack on the kid. So claiming so is either the work of a liar or someone who is unreasonable. Because I think you're reasonable, in the most base way, you are thus lying.

I don't expect you to go feebly into the night. I expect you to continue with your stupidity and dumbassery.

I never said that you attacking the kid was a fact. In my view, you were picking on his kid. I said so. I believe that was your intent, and I expressed my subjective opinion. Remarks made on a message board can be perceived many different ways, the written word certainly has a different tone than the spoken one, so my perception falls within the bounds of reasonable. Given the nature of the thread, it most certainly could be reasonably seen as picking on the kid. Again, if you become a parent, you will understand. It does not excuse FC58's reaction. Your argument would have more merit if you had not come back and commented again after his first response.

Interesting how you get to repeat your side of the argument over and over again, but if I repeat my side, it becomes an instigation, a set of lies, etc. Seems like a double standard to me.

|Zach|

07-26-2011, 01:25 AM

In my view, you were picking on his kid.

LMAO

mnchiefsguy

07-26-2011, 01:26 AM

It is true. You are brave to rage....RAGE against the dying of the light while you attempt to create a kid controversy where there is none.

Jenson didn't talk shit on his kid.

Maybe, maybe not. The argument has gone beyond that now. Jenson is trying to be the internet bully, and I am too stubborn to accommodate him at this time.

|Zach|

07-26-2011, 01:26 AM

Maybe, maybe not. The argument has gone beyond that now. Jenson is trying to be the internet bully, and I am too stubborn to accommodate him at this time.

Yes. We know...you are running on empty in the real problems department and arguing just to argue.

At least you see how silly you are.

Jenson71

07-26-2011, 01:30 AM

I never said that you attacking the kid was a fact. In my view, you were picking on his kid. I said so.

Good Lord, the extreme lack of logic and understanding in your thought process is nearly unbearable.

You don't have to say that attacking the kid is a fact. It just simply is a fact by the nature of its sentence. "You were attacking the kid" is a statement of fact, that purports to declare the truth of events that took place in this world. This fact can be wrong or right, but it cannot be neither, no matter a preface declaring the following to be your opinion! It either accurately states the truth of the events, or it is wrong. How do you not understand this?

Do you go around saying, "It's my opinion that gravity does not exist. This is a valid argument because I said it's my opinion, and I can't be challenged on its accuracy, I'm just allowed to state such with no repercussions!" If you do, people will say, "No, gravity's existence is not a matter of opinion, but a matter of fact, and your opinion, which is actually a statement of fact, no matter how strongly you hold it, is factually incorrect."

mnchiefsguy

07-26-2011, 01:31 AM

Yes. We know...you are running on empty in the real problems department and arguing just to argue.

At least you see how silly you are.

It is kind of silly...but he keeps answering. He can't walk away. He has to continually hammer home the point that I am liar...

Call my opinion stupid, call it wrong, call it whatever, but it was not a lie. An opinion cannot be a lie. My perception cannot be a lie.

He wants a pass and no blame for his part of the argument. He was egging FC58 on, but he is not honest enough to admit. I admit, Jenson pissed me off, and the pm did too, so I did egg Jenson on a bit since he seemed so fired up about it. Then he started trying to intimidate me with his posts and his tone, so I responded to that. Call it petty, call it whatever. It is not important in the slightest in the grand scheme of things...but it seems to be consuming Jenson's existence, so that is something I guess.

|Zach|

07-26-2011, 01:36 AM

It is kind of silly...but he keeps answering. He can't walk away. He has to continually hammer home the point that I am liar...

Call my opinion stupid, call it wrong, call it whatever, but it was not a lie. An opinion cannot be a lie. My perception cannot be a lie.

He wants a pass and no blame for his part of the argument. He was egging FC58 on, but he is not honest enough to admit. I admit, Jenson pissed me off, and the pm did too, so I did egg Jenson on a bit since he seemed so fired up about it. Then he started trying to intimidate me with his posts and his tone, so I responded to that. Call it petty, call it whatever. It is not important in the slightest in the grand scheme of things...but it seems to be consuming Jenson's existence, so that is something I guess.

It is my opinion the Chiefs colors are green and purple.

Don't call me wrong or a liar.

|Zach|

07-26-2011, 01:37 AM

I am also LMAOing at the idea of me sitting down and arguing with someone while at the same time acting like it is only consuming for them.

This is quite a back and forth.

mnchiefsguy

07-26-2011, 01:42 AM

I am also LMAOing at the idea of me sitting down and arguing with someone while at the same time acting like it is only consuming for them.

This is quite a back and forth.

I am stubborn, but am not consumed by it. Boring night at work, although I get to leave here in a little bit, so I am probably done for the night. I will not speculate as to whether Jenson is consumed, or merely stubborn as well.

Jenson71

07-26-2011, 01:44 AM

Call it petty, call it whatever. It is not important in the slightest in the grand scheme of things...but it seems to be consuming Jenson's existence, so that is something I guess.

Not only am I younger than you, but I'm on summer vacation, and have very flexible internships that don't put a lot of responsibility on my shoulders. I could skip work tomorrow and be fine. You, on the other hand, probably have a family to take care of. Your line of responsibility is so greater than mine, and so the way you are using your life, arguing with a 23 year old you dislike on an internet message board, means you're being so greatly more irresponsible than I am.

So at least that's a game you've beat me on. Well done, sir. You're a true model to the rest of us.

Jenson71

07-26-2011, 01:45 AM

I am stubborn, but am not consumed by it. Boring night at work, although I get to leave here in a little bit, so I am probably done for the night. I will not speculate as to whether Jenson is consumed, or merely stubborn as well.

Oh, so this is what you do at work? Don't shrug there, Atlas. We're all counting on you.

As for me, throughout the past two hours, I've just been following the Royals game in one screen, going through my websites in another. Quite leisurely, without many cares. The joys of being a 23 year old. Or, in your case, I suppose, a 39 year old father.

|Zach|

07-26-2011, 01:47 AM

I am stubborn, but am not consumed by it. Boring night at work, although I get to leave here in a little bit, so I am probably done for the night. I will not speculate as to whether Jenson is consumed, or merely stubborn as well.

You won't?

Call it petty, call it whatever. It is not important in the slightest in the grand scheme of things...but it seems to be consuming Jenson's existence, so that is something I guess.

Jenson71

07-26-2011, 01:59 AM

You won't?

That wasn't a speculation! That, uh, that was an opinion! Yeah, I got my opinion card out. It's like my little Get Out Of Jail Free!

stevieray

07-26-2011, 11:22 AM

That's a great standard, Chief Justice. I can create faux outrage, threaten to kill you, and get you banned for supposedly egging me on.

You know what, you're egging me on right now. You need to be banned. You know, out of fairness.

Or we could keep the rules they are, and just say that people are responsible for their own words in this forum. Or does that make too much sense for you? No, no, I know what you're real goal is: it's not sense, it's not fairness. It's punishing people you don't like.

awwwww...ROFL

it must be brutal being you.

mnchiefsguy

07-26-2011, 11:44 AM

You won't?

No, I won't, since I already did :doh!:. Quote #2 preceded quote #1, and I either did not wish to repeat myself, or forgot that that was what I posted. Not sure which.

mnchiefsguy

07-26-2011, 11:45 AM

Not only am I younger than you, but I'm on summer vacation, and have very flexible internships that don't put a lot of responsibility on my shoulders. I could skip work tomorrow and be fine. You, on the other hand, probably have a family to take care of. Your line of responsibility is so greater than mine, and so the way you are using your life, arguing with a 23 year old you dislike on an internet message board, means you're being so greatly more irresponsible than I am.

So at least that's a game you've beat me on. Well done, sir. You're a true model to the rest of us.

Wow, your butthurt knows no bounds it appears. Nice to know that anyone with a job and responsibility should not be on a message board. I am sure the rest of CP great appreciates that enlightened opinion.

Frankie

07-26-2011, 11:45 AM

awwwww...ROFL

it must be brutal being you.

Oh irony,..... I-RO-NY!!! :LOL:

mnchiefsguy

07-26-2011, 11:51 AM

Oh, so this is what you do at work? Don't shrug there, Atlas. We're all counting on you.

As for me, throughout the past two hours, I've just been following the Royals game in one screen, going through my websites in another. Quite leisurely, without many cares. The joys of being a 23 year old. Or, in your case, I suppose, a 39 year old father.

Must have really struck a nerve with you to get not one, but two responses poking at my jobs.

Atlas I am not, but you sure do think you are superior to him in your relevance to the world.

vailpass

07-26-2011, 11:52 AM

No wonder Jenson's flunking out of law school.

go bowe

07-26-2011, 11:53 AM

No wonder Jenson's flunking out of law school.

is he? :shrug:

go bowe

07-26-2011, 11:54 AM

Must have really struck a nerve with you to get not one, but two responses poking at my jobs.

Atlas I am not, but you sure do think you are superior to him in your relevance to the world.

eh, jobs are overrated...

mnchiefsguy

07-26-2011, 11:57 AM

eh, jobs are overrated...

Overrated, but necessary, at least until I win the WSOP. :LOL:

go bowe

07-26-2011, 11:59 AM

Overrated, but necessary, at least until I win the WSOP. :LOL:

well, i'll be rooting for ya... :thumb:

stevieray

07-26-2011, 12:00 PM

Oh irony,..... I-RO-NY!!! :LOL:

hey, I forgot to thank you for proving my point earlier! thx!

:thumb:

mnchiefsguy

07-26-2011, 12:02 PM

well, i'll be rooting for ya... :thumb:

I would love to compete in that some day, but I am an average poker player at best. I would be content if we could just get online poker back.

vailpass

07-26-2011, 12:03 PM

is he? :shrug:

If he's not he should be. He has as bad a case of first-year law student trying to play lawyer in every sentence as I've ever seen, and I've known some law students.
I'm guessing he got pushed around a lot as a kid, maybe still does.

go bowe

07-26-2011, 12:09 PM

If he's not he should be. He has as bad a case of first-year law student trying to play lawyer in every sentence as I've ever seen, and I've known some law students.
I'm guessing he got pushed around a lot as a kid, maybe still does.

they have law students where you live? :eek: :eek: :eek:

vailpass

07-26-2011, 12:11 PM

they have law students where you live? :eek: :eek: :eek:

I should have said "when I was young." I don't know if they have law students here but if they do they go to ASu which means they sucked to bad to get into a real school.

Frankie

07-26-2011, 12:13 PM

hey, I forgot to thank you for proving my point earlier! thx!

:thumb:

Glad to oblige, in the far fetched assumption there IS a point in any of your posts.

go bowe

07-26-2011, 12:14 PM

I should have said "when I was young." I don't know if they have law students here but if they do they go to ASu which means they sucked to bad to get into a real school.

well, judging from your avatar, i would guess that u of iowa is a good school...